4 ms·

I think you are doing some backwards reasoning based on the prevalence of English in computing to justify why we would only need the English alphabet. > * Almo

by vore 4y ago

I think you are doing some backwards reasoning based on the prevalence of English in computing to justify why we would only need the English alphabet. > * Almost all languages have widely used, standardized transliteration systems into a Latin script. That's not true for Cyrillic. There may be standard transliteration systems for non-English alphabet languages, but there are often multiple standard transliteration systems (e.g. Russian, Arabic). Also, Chinese transliteration is pretty gobbledygook without diacritics that aren't present in the English alphabet (and kind of gobbledygook even with diacritics). > * English is far more widely spoken and read than any language written in Cyrillic. What if the de facto language of computing was Mandarin instead? > * The subset of the Latin script used by English is essentially the common denominator of all languages written in Latin. That's an extremely important property and immediately predisposes English for the role it has today. The Latin script used by English is exactly all the letters you need to write English. Many other languages written in Latin script either have more (e.g. Spanish, Norwegian), or fewer (e.g. Italian, Serbian), or have different rules for certain things (e.g. Turkish).

p-e-w 4y ago
> What if the de facto language of computing was Mandarin instead? Mandarin isn't "widely" spoken. It's spoken by a large number of people, almost all of which reside in a single country. This makes it utterly useless as an international standard. And the Chinese writing system would have been far too complicated to become the foundation of computing. We're talking a couple dozen characters vs. tens of thousands. Only recently did it even become possible to accurately represent the whole gamut of Chinese writing using digital systems.
- vore 4y ago
  Sure, I agree that far fewer people would want to use Mandarin as a lingua franca compared to English, but that's not really a computing-specific thing but more a reflection of its cultural dominance in general. That said, technology follows the needs of people, not the other way round. If we were living in a parallel reality where Mandarin had the cultural cachet of English, I'm positive we would have immediately subjugated computers to deal with Chinese characters ;-)
- thaumasiotes 4y ago
  > Mandarin isn't "widely" spoken. It's spoken by a large number of people, almost all of which reside in a single country. This makes it utterly useless as an international standard. The norm for international communication is that zero people on either side speak the language. Internal communication anywhere in Achaemenid Persia took place in Imperial Aramaic, which was spoken by some subject peoples in the west of the empire. International communication between Mitanni (speaking an unnamed Indic language) and Egypt (speaking (Afroasiatic) Middle or Late Egyptian) took place in (Semitic) Akkadian. International communication between Japan and Korea took place in classical Chinese, spoken by neither side and unrelated to the languages spoken in either. Similarly, international communication between Vietnam and China took place in classical Chinese, spoken by neither side (though closely related to the languages spoken in China). Treaties between early modern Russia and China could not be concluded in classical Chinese, so they were concluded in Latin, spoken by neither side. It just isn't an expectation that international communication will use a language that is spoken by any party to the communication. This is for the obvious reason that anyone who wants to join the conversation uses whatever is already in use, even if the language currently in use has been dead for a thousand years.
- fomine3 4y ago
  Overseas Chinese is a thing
thaumasiotes 4y ago
> The Latin script used by English is exactly all the letters you need to write English. Only true in the sense that that is how English spelling is currently defined. If you wanted to come up with a script for English from scratch, it would look nothing like the Latin script. It would not be isomorphic to the Latin script. Compare this inventory of phonemes in General American English, with 24 consonants and 13-15 vowels, of which only 5 are diphthongs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_American_English#Phonology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_American_English#Phono...

by vore 4y ago

p-e-w 4y ago

> What if the de facto language of computing was Mandarin instead? Mandarin isn't "widely" spoken. It's spoken by a large number of people, almost all of which reside in a single country. This makes it utterly useless as an international standard. And the Chinese writing system would have been far too complicated to become the foundation of computing. We're talking a couple dozen characters vs. tens of thousands. Only recently did it even become possible to accurately represent the whole gamut of Chinese writing using digital systems.

vore 4y ago
Sure, I agree that far fewer people would want to use Mandarin as a lingua franca compared to English, but that's not really a computing-specific thing but more a reflection of its cultural dominance in general. That said, technology follows the needs of people, not the other way round. If we were living in a parallel reality where Mandarin had the cultural cachet of English, I'm positive we would have immediately subjugated computers to deal with Chinese characters ;-)
thaumasiotes 4y ago
> Mandarin isn't "widely" spoken. It's spoken by a large number of people, almost all of which reside in a single country. This makes it utterly useless as an international standard. The norm for international communication is that zero people on either side speak the language. Internal communication anywhere in Achaemenid Persia took place in Imperial Aramaic, which was spoken by some subject peoples in the west of the empire. International communication between Mitanni (speaking an unnamed Indic language) and Egypt (speaking (Afroasiatic) Middle or Late Egyptian) took place in (Semitic) Akkadian. International communication between Japan and Korea took place in classical Chinese, spoken by neither side and unrelated to the languages spoken in either. Similarly, international communication between Vietnam and China took place in classical Chinese, spoken by neither side (though closely related to the languages spoken in China). Treaties between early modern Russia and China could not be concluded in classical Chinese, so they were concluded in Latin, spoken by neither side. It just isn't an expectation that international communication will use a language that is spoken by any party to the communication. This is for the obvious reason that anyone who wants to join the conversation uses whatever is already in use, even if the language currently in use has been dead for a thousand years.
fomine3 4y ago
Overseas Chinese is a thing

thaumasiotes 4y ago

> The Latin script used by English is exactly all the letters you need to write English. Only true in the sense that that is how English spelling is currently defined. If you wanted to come up with a script for English from scratch, it would look nothing like the Latin script. It would not be isomorphic to the Latin script. Compare this inventory of phonemes in General American English, with 24 consonants and 13-15 vowels, of which only 5 are diphthongs: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_American_English#Phonology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_American_English#Phono...