Like, English is a famously difficult language, and Spanish is supposed to be easier. But babies learn English or any language instinctually.
So do babies learn faster if the native language is easier, or do they acquire language at a constant rate depending on their brain development or whatever?
Ataturk famously switched Turkey to a modified Latin alphabet instead of an Arabic-based one in order to boost literacy rates. Combined with a huge push to educate people on the alphabet it seemed to be successful.
Based. Many are saying polish would make more sense in a Cyrillic alphabet. I couldn’t say
I’m of the view that a bunch of digraphs would be reduced to single letters if Polish used the Cyrillic script. But some commenters noted that other letters don’t map that nicely. However, then again, variations of Cyrillic across Eastern Europe and Central Asia include a range of letters that aren’t in Russian, for example, so idk why Polish couldn’t use those or add a few of its own.
Yeah. As far as I can tell, no two languages share an identical Cyrillic alphabet.
Also Bulgarian, but I know some Bulgarians that just write with Latin letters because it’s quicker, given that they live in a Latin alphabet country.
It is not quicker to type Bulgarian in Latin quite the opposite. There are sounds in Bulgarian that using the Cyrillic alphabet are represented using one letter, where as with the Latin alphabet you need 2 or in one case 3 щ = sht.
Usually people that write with Latin are just lazy to switch keyboards.
Yes, I’m sorry. I meant it’s quicker because they don’t have to switch keyboard layout, not because they save keystrokes