🇳🇱
I want to understand better the split between logographic and phonemic writing systems. As far as i know logographicnlanguages in the modern world are all asian and of a similar character. So id imagine they all have the same roots.
@freemo Roots of the language and of the writing system are not necessarily the same. There were multiple instances of significant import of "characters" from ~Chinese into Japanese and I had the impression that at least some of them didn't import much past the characters themselves.
Id love to ubderstand how that developed. Importing a writing system but not a language only seems possible at all with logograms which is kinda cool.
Huh? Isn't that the case with all languages that use Latin alphabet but aren't romance?
No, letters arent a writi g system a writing system would be the meaning of the words, the grammer, everything but the sounds.
In logographic languages the same or similar symbol has entierly different spoken words attached to it but the symbol would mean the same.
In a phonographic language that cant be possible since the letters represent soubds so the spoken language is explicitly linked to the written.
Also im not sure thisnis even accurate of the script. The latin script evolved from a common rood language (indo european). While it is true the germanic language branched off before the evolution into latin script, and lost the indo european script and was largely oral, it readopted latin which was related to its earlier common script. Id imagine this or similar is true for some of the other language families. However cyrilic never adoped latin and is also from thr indo-european root, it evolved seperately from the common root script.
