[kahnpro]

I've been learning Russian for two years, and I can only agree with you. Learning to read and write Cyrillic script was the easiest part of this adventure.

And I think learning all sorts of nuances of the language would be more complicated using Latin script. Latin script also hides the fact that, even though the letters are similar, they really are different sounds. I feel like it would only hinder pronunciation.

[krick]

It really isn't fair to compare Cyrillic script with Arabic. Cyrillic is basically the same script as Latin, even characters are alike. Hell, even something like Japanese hiragana is pretty much the same stuff as Latin alphabet, even though it looks nothing like that and is built upon syllables, not letters. And hence it is a bit harder to learn, but not by much.

However Arabic script is a whole different thing. It has a whole lot of diacritics, characters change their shape depending on the position within a word, characters are notably less distinctive for an unaccustomed European than Latin letters, Cyrillic letters, hiragana or runes.

[_samihasan_]

The comparison of Arabic with Russian is not sound as Arabic is written with diacritics which in and of itself is a big plus if you're a native speaker or an experienced one but not so for inexperienced or novice speakers while Russian to my understanding is more explicit about that part.

[vetinari]

Do I understand you right, that Arabic uses diacritics when written in Arabic script? Or did you mean Arabic when written in Latin script?

Using diacritics is usually a sign, that the language uses a script that does not map very well to the target language, so the latter would be understandable.

Slavic languages would the same in this regards. Those, that are written in Latin script, have to use diacritics. Those that use Cyrillic, do not need to.

[varjag]

All Cyrillic alphabets I am aware of do use diacritics. Й, Ў, Ё, Ґ..

[vetinari]

While you are of course right, that there exist such characters, Belorussian and Ukrainian are not all Cyrillic alphabets.

But then, I'm also not an expert on all Slavic languages, I just remember when I was taught Russian and azbuka years ago, there was none and that caught my attention.

[lisivka]

> Belorussian and Ukrainian are not all Cyrillic alphabets.

LOL Please, tell us an «all Cyrillic» alphabet. Old Church Slavonic by Saints Cyril and Methodius maybe?

Why Belorussian and Ukrainian are «not all Cyrillic alphabets»? (I'm Ukrainian).

[vetinari]

There's the difference between 'some' and 'all'. Ukrainian and Belorussian are 'some', not 'all'.

Language may have some local specifics - Serbians have Ћ, which all other Cyrillic-using languages do not have. You have І instead of И, etc.

[varjag]

Й and ё are in Russian alphabet. In schools it is never highlighted that those are diacritics, so to many it doesn't register.

[vostok]

Are those diacritics? I tend to think of them as separate letters just as å and ä are separate letters in Swedish. Of course, ё is usually written as е so I may well be wrong about that.

This is different from è, é, ë, and ê in French where these are all e, but with different diacritics.

[lisivka]

Those letters use no diacritics. They are just letters.

[varjag]

These are the letters with diacritic marks.

[lisivka]

No. іе -> ё, іі -> ї, иі -> й. оу -> ў. They are just shortened, to write less.