|
|
|
|
|
by Panzerschrek
1 day ago
|
|
> Arabic was the premier language for philosophy, science But this was not for ordinary people (peasants) or even accountants, where practicality matters. > Your brain is not powerful enough to pattern-match, but your incapacity is not universal With some training it's possible to read Arabic texts. But this requires more mental load and practice compared to other alphabetical systems. > Literal billions in the world disagree Argumentum ad populum. There also billions of people using even worse writing systems - non-alphabetical ones. This doesn't mean that they are as good as alphabetical systems like latin. The video you linked has nothing to do with practicality. It's about calligraphy, which is an art form. It may look good, but it doesn't matter for daily use when one needs to read and type a lot. |
|
All peasant societies were illiterate, including Latin script adopters. Completely irrelevant to Arabic.
"Or even accountants" - apparently, Arabs didn't trade! It's not like Muhammad himself was, you know, a trader and an accountant...
> With some training it's possible to read Arabic texts. But this requires more mental load and practice compared to other alphabetical systems.
Perhaps your brain is too slow. I and many other bilinguals read Arabic even more quickly and efficiently than Latin-script languages. The words are terser and are read as units as opposed to the inefficient character-by-character Latin system. Speed-reading doesn't exist in Arabic because Arabic is already speedily read.
> It may look good, but it doesn't matter for daily use when one needs to read and type a lot.
You just said it was objectively horrible looking above. But consistency cannot be expected of a jumbled mind.