|
|
|
|
|
by necovek
40 days ago
|
|
You are absolutely right that there are examples where Cyrillic as used by Slavic languages is not perfectly "clean" either, and it's certainly a lot more nuanced than my simplistic and absolutist claim. Perhaps people misunderstood me: it is not a _technical_ property of Cyrillic (vs Latin) script per se, but a combination of historical setting and ability to adapt the script to the (smaller) group's language. This has led to Cyrillic scripts being _developed_ to be technically more suitable for Slavic languages, because where Latin script was used, there was not as much liberty (perceived or real). I mean, either is just a set of pictograms representing parts of spoken words, and obviously, if developed similarly, there is no difference between them. But for Slavic languages they were _not_ developed similarly, which is my point. |
|