Notes and corrections: The evolution of the alphabet was heavily simplified to be easier to fit into the video and communicate. I left out parts like the Etruscans and other letters like the long S and Ampersand. I would recommend doing your own extra research if that sounds interesting to you. I'm not sure how I managed this but I accidentally said that thew letter Yogh made the "w" sound when it actually made the now largely unused guttural yh sound (Like in the proper pronunciation of loch). I've no idea how that slipped through, sorry about that. I mispronounced boustrophedon Ironically enough, I misspelt colonel in the visual showing how poor the spelling of colonel is. I stumbled over my speech at 2:08 and said that Indo-European was a language spoken by 'The very first people to arrive in Europe and Asia' which isn't true, I wrote 'One of the first languages spoken by a group of people' but verbally hiccupped a little. Aleph didn't actually make the 'a' sound, it actually made the sound of the global stop but it's easier for the average person to understand 'a' I mixed around the sounds for thorn and eth. Sorry for all the inaccuracies!
Linguistics are very fascinating and someone had to bring religion into this and here’s the thing I’m religious too. Although I think topics should be kept where they belong to.
I wanted to let you know that alef didn't represent the a sound. It was a glotal stop. That's why it is seen as being silent in many word...at least by English speakers. In some languages, vowels can be pronounced without a glotal stop at the beginning, but English doesn't do this, so we don't usually recognize the stop at the beginning of words. You also have the pronunciation of thorn and eth backwards. Thorn was unvoiced, and eth was voiced. I do enjoy your video i just figured I'd let you know that there were some small mistakes.
2:19 The speakers of Indo-European languages were, by far, not the first group of people to enter Europe or Asia. I’m sure it was just a misspeak though
I find the English language very interesting. The fact that it has been influenced by Franch and Norse, while also having its roots in the Germanic branch of the Indo-European languages makes it so unique, charming and pleasant hear. I think that's the reason why it works so well as a universal language, given its many influences. I also think it's one of the most beaultiful languages when written.
No, it's ugly. No accents, no capitalization the middle, no Cyrillic awesomeness combining lots of sounds to a letter, no cool strokes beyond cursive, no intuitive mouth sounds for a letter. And structurally, it barely changes at all. There aren't enough tenses or aspects or cases to put what you want to say onto any one word, and you're not moving words around that much either...so you're writing everything in such a mechanical, lifeless manner, with random words and phrases thrown in where just spicing up one word does the same thing. Unless you're Yoda. English is a masterclass in being boring. Boring. Boring. If anything, it's universal just because it's boring enough to hide in plain sight and not offend anyone. Hell, that's why everyone is "you" and in the nicest way possible...while the rest of the world has honorifics and formalities. Since I have a degree in English, I get the right to roast it.
I have made a pan European language with ð and þ as well as many diphtongs and no silent e. You can write whole sentences with just one word. It should be understandable as an English, Frisian, Dutch, Swedish or Germanic speaker.
Having my native language lack digraphs and learning about Finnish, a language that is written the same way as it is spoken, made me really hate English, despite having been fluent in it for many years.
Fear not, a sequel will be made at some point. I'm just taking a little break from infinity because I feel like too much unfiltered infinity could do my brain in.
And whole numbers The fractions The rationals The irrationals The reals The imaginaries And at last but not the least(for now) what about complex numbers
Oh, and _also,_ the Printing Press came along in the late 15th century. Spelling was standardised by what the Flemish thought the dialect around _roughly_ Cambridge sounded like, and it hasn't been significantly changed since (apart from maybe Webster creating American English spelling).
Dear sir: 6:49 the Romans adopted their writing from the Etruscans, who got them from the Graecians of Magna Graecia. 7:12 Y and Z where adopted to translitterate Greek words Then someone called Gregorius tired of people misreading his name; Took the letter C and added a Γ to people would stop calling him Crecorio. And finaly Emperor Claudius came and standardised the whole thing. 7:23 You forgot the Carolingian standardisation of Latin pronounciation. Which still affects how we write to this day. Basically they decided that "C" would be pronounced as "ʧ" for instance. ~They did base it on spoken vulgar Latin, so not arbitrarily~ "V" started out as W/U depending on the context; But got bastardised into the modern /v/ by peasants and barbarians. "J" started its life more like how we use "Y", but people began using it to mean "ʤ" at some point; Nativelang blames the French, Raffaello Urbani on Late Latin speech. 8:22 You forgot Renaissance poets with their pretentious spelling. But you did a decent job.
Aleph did make an /a/ sound and Latin did have a long I. "𐤀" does make and /a/ sound depending on: -The language: In Hebrew and Aramaic it is sometimes used as an /a/ mostly make it easier to read. Arabic uses the base alif to denote /ā/ sound. Same goes for the long I; since Latin does have consonant /j/ and vowel /i/ independently. It made sense to denote the difference; To make reading easier.
@@ariebrons7976 A quick google search says “J was developed in the medieval period, after the fall of the Western Roman Empire”. Plus wouldn’t /w/ and /u/ also be written differently too if /i/ and /j/ were written differently?
@@MrRhombus Luke Rainiery in one of his Latin reader reviews mentions that "It is a pain when printers decide to be 'ancient' and not print the long J, because it really screws up my reading". ~I forgot which video it was, as he does make many simmilar videos~ On your 'W' question: I believe it is much like other languages that use V for W/U: This is an Arabic W: "و" And arabic U "وُ" Arabic OO/AU "وَ" Persian V "وْ"/"ۏ" Hebrew has more like a digraph systhem, like in Latin script: "𐤅" = Wa/U/OO ~contextual/archaic~ (depending on context) "𐤅𐤅" = W or V ~Medeival/Modern~ "𐤀𐤅" = OO/AU ~ mostly modern~ "𐤉𐤅" = IU / German U ~rarely used~ "𐤅𐤉" = Vey/Why It can also use a B instead of a V, which is borrowed from Assyrian. Shadiversity has an excelent video on the topic: Proof that Medeival People Could Read!!!
I feel bad now because, now that I've seen some of the other videos that cover this topic, it is true that hardly anyone mentions the Etruscans. Poor Etruscans.
@RandomAndgit Also, I'm not sure if you know this, but there was no rotating of any A's ever in the history of A's. It was simply a copying error made initially by the Greeks, to the best of my knowledge, and that they slowly moved the top of the head of this ox 🐂 all the way up 'till it touched the tip of its horns, this made a triangular flag sort of shape. 🚩like this one, but swaying left. Then, over time, the style of the letter among Greeks, then through the Etruscans, and eventually the Romans, started a change so that the line in the centre, that being the lower half of the ox's head, slowly started straightening out to look like the A of today. I hope you understand better now. I know why everyone skips over this important fact when the evidence is there, but everyone jumps to the conclusion that they rotated the letter when it starts becoming familiar. Though if you think about it, why would anyone rotate anything? And where's the evidence?
What is your evidence that Indo-European tribes were the first humans in Europe? I think the Basques were there before them as well as other human groups for tens of thousands of years before Indo-Europeans arrived.
As mentioned in the pinned comment, I meant to say, but didn't by a slip of the tongue, that is was one of the first languages spoken by a group of people moving into Europe and Asia.
@@RandomAndgit - modern humans first arrived in Europe 45,000 years ago. Arrival of Indo-Europeans can be traced to less than 5000 years ago. This statement is false.
@@danidejaneiro8378 And as you would know if you payed attention to what you read, that statement was brought about by a minor slip of the tongue and corrected in the pinned comment. Please read the message thoroughly before replying to it.
@@RandomAndgit - “one of the first languages spoken by people moving into Europe”. This is false. You’re off by about 40,000 years. Please pay more attention to what you say and write
@@danidejaneiro8378 And AGAIN you either didn't read or are incapable of understanding what was in my previous message.Do not bother replying because you have proved yourself incapable of holding a conversation in which both parties listen to the other.
@@RandomAndgit - 01:08 "While almost every culture in the world has some means of verbal communication, linguists generally agree on only four times that language was independently invented."
