>No, because Russian/Cyrillic lacks the properties that make English/Latin so useful as a universal language/script: Which is in particular? >Almost all langu

>No, because Russian/Cyrillic lacks the properties that make English/Latin so useful as a universal language/script: Which is in particular? >Almost all languages have widely used, standardized transliteration systems into a Latin script. That's not true for Cyrillic. Combination of historical circumstances and you confusing cause and effect. You can write english in cyrilic. >English is far more widely spoken and read than any language written in Cyrillic. See above. >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. Why? It makes english almost the only language you can write properly. This is a bad property.