Visual Evolution of Writing Systems Towards Latin Alphabet – A Hypothesis

1 The composing speaks to discourse thought

Discourse and composing started freely of one another. Human discourse most likely seemed long time before composing. Most punctual works created from illustrations. They were of visual birthplace, as pictographs, ideograms. As time passed by, compositions were spatially organized successively in lines, relating to the consecutive property of discourse in time area. As composing frameworks advanced the alphabetic way, works and discourse related with one another more tightly and more tightly, proceeding to show day. The letter sets lost pictographic property. As alphabetic frameworks have supplanted their pictographic [1] ancestors and picked up predominance, it appears to be normal to reason that the advancement of composing frameworks is to all the more likely speak to language sounds. This end is rich, instinctive, sensible and basing on certainties and examines.

It absolutely can’t clarify a few cases, for example, the Chinese didn’t advance into letters in order. Be that as it may, the Chinese characters are accused to be too mind boggling to even think about representing discourse. The cutting edge Chinese composing is more firmly connected with spoken Chinese than old Chinese composing does. In addition, characters have been disentangled in terrain China. Chinese composition looks like making a little stride towards speaking to discourse. Little questions have been casted on this end, albeit numerous researchers think about composition as more than essentially speaking to discourse. Speaking to discourse appears a foreordained heading. We should be somewhat doubtful on this common end.

Without thorough verification, this end is underestimated by man because of its instinct and accord to most realities and history of letters in order. Give me now a chance to pose some essential inquiries. Why letter sets preferable speak to sounds over pictographs do? How to decide whether a content is great at speaking to sounds? Are a few letter sets preferable in speaking to sounds over different letters in order are? Should advancement be ascribed to the verbally expressed structure, composed structure or the speaking to itself? These straightforward inquiries are difficult to reply. Why not quality the development of keeping in touch with the visual structure, at that point? That can surely have greater lucidity and turned out to be basic as keeping in touch with itself is visual animal. Why individuals still adhere to the ‘speak to discourse’ thought at that point? Following are some potential reasons.

Discourse and composing both changed much after some time. They connected with one another more tightly and more tightly and are viewed as same thing – language. Discourse is viewed as essential in language, which is by a wide margin implied spoken language. Discourse is related with human instinct, while composing is viewed as an ancient rarity. There are two. One is they partner with one another. The other is discourse is essential. The last is itself a significant, albeit underestimated. Here we take nonpartisan position and won’t attempt to endorse nor dismiss it. As we have stated, discourse and composing has free sources. The connection between them isn’t prior. They are set up after long-term use. The resultant association among composing and discourse shouldn’t be taken as the reason for the composition to develop. Or maybe, the qualities of composing ought to be dissected to clarify how it advances outwardly. At that point, the discourse composing affiliation’s effect on composing’s advancement ought to be tended to.

2 Visual advancement of composing

Advancement of composing is reflected in its visual attributes. We can without much of a stretch see the notable visual qualification among letters in order and pictographs. Letter set is an institutionalized arrangement of letters. They as a rule involve many letters, and are gotten from complex pictographic contents. Pictographs are perplexing and colossal in sum. It is justifiable to imagine that they have not advanced outwardly. Whenever advanced outwardly, why getting to be more straightforward rather than increasingly intricate? On the off chance that composing is taken as visual craftsmanship, it ought to advance towards more prominent intricacy. Be that as it may, composing is a methods for correspondence, speaking to and recording information.

The clearness, comfort, productivity and reasonableness for perusing subsequently turned out to be principle concern. Toward the start, illustrations were to portray something straightforwardly, as pictures. They were masterminded more often than not in lines to speak to importance ceaselessly. Clearly, the intricate pictographs are difficult to perceive, bringing down perusing precision. It influences the perusing familiarity since additional time is spent focusing at one pictograph before moving to the following. Complex images are disposed of or improved to encourage straight perusing. A few images had more straightforward and more clear visual example and were all the more as often as possible utilized. Long time passed, just a lot of images are left and institutionalized. We call them letter sets. The decrease in number, improvement and institutionalization encourage visual control and remembrance, driving the letter sets to supplant pictographs. Alphabetic composing is more appropriate for perusing than pictographic frameworks. We utilize the word ‘neatness’ to mean the idea ‘fit for perusing’, which we believe is the focal in advancement.

How intelligibility produces results? What is the system, at that point? In the present world, writings detonate. Through web, one can without much of a stretch discover writings of any subject. The extent of the composed world is for all intents and purposes uncertain. Regardless, message still includes fundamental individual images. Investigation should be possible on the images and arrangement of images. By basically investigating the images, we are not overpowered by the blast. These images are perused and composed by human. They have impact on people by means of the eyes and cerebrum. Decipherability guideline begins during perusing, and afterward works in speculation and composing while visual information is put away and prepared in the cerebrum. Albeit intelligible images can be organized well and read simpler, the visual examples themselves are not the explanation behind perusing. Individuals read in light of the fact that the perusing material reflects true which is of the peruser’s advantage. Perusing material is existent in advance.

They need to learn and utilize existing framework paying little respect to its clarity and will in general read the images they are comfortable [2] with. Be that as it may, Texts of various degrees of clarity have various impacts. Clear composing is effectively perused, remembered, handled by mind and worked out. Clear composition dazzles the eyes further and works in the mind all the more viably and emphatically. More compositions of more noteworthy readability are perused and delivered than those with less decipherability. Subsequent to preparing by the mind, the content worked out has the propensity of being preferred designed over those that are perused. In other words, clear compositions have more noteworthy capacity to invigorate one to compose.

Subsequently, the compositions delivered later will in general be more intelligible than the prior, changing the presence of the composition framework. Readability is singular ward. Person’s composition changes are not at a similar pace. Change of a composition framework is an aftereffect of changes made by the entirety of people’s composed works. The presence of post-change framework generally does not contrast totally from pre-change framework. This development is quite a while procedure and might wind up recognizable after ages.

Readability guideline works beginning from individual images, at that point all through whole composition framework. The conspicuousness of image/word frames, between differentiability of images, and between differentiability of words are the premise of a content’s decipherability. Images/words are basic. The quality of a composition framework is typically made a decision on its whole [3] – its everything composed works, the zone and individuals it covers, all information it speaks to and so on. The overwhelming framework isn’t really the most neat. In any case, readability will display its capacity as increasingly decipherable composition framework becomes quicker.

Singular images/words are building units of entire framework and, essentially decide how the entire framework looks like and the potential it can extend. Decipherable images/words can be composed better and extend further. Intelligible framework has increasingly composed works or can possibly be such. It can become greater and hence speak to more learning, prompting its prosperity. Images structure words, sentences and inevitably an entire framework. Standards/language produces for word development and masterminding words together. There are likewise prescribed methods for arranging and composing passages, theory and book, however they haven’t become rules. These principles and proposals suggest the qualities of bigger phonetic units, encouraging perusing and growing intelligibility from image level to express, sentence levels and all through the whole framework. Over the long haul, progressively intelligible framework overwhelms/replaces less-decipherable framework.

3 Spoken language’s impact and pragmatic elements

Without spoken language, composing would have certainly developed distinctively as it has been.Writing itself is fit for advancing alone. Be that as it may, in all actuality, discourse impacts its advancement altogether. Since they are related, composing and discourse impact each other [4]. Composing and discourse have their own attributes, decipherability for composing, pronounceability and intelligibility for discourse. During their communication, they are influenced by one another and meanwhile attempt to keep up their very own attributes. Practically all present-day compositions are pronounceable. That appears proof that composing speaks to discourse. Be that as it may, from another edge, we additionally observe that practically all discourses are writable. It ought to be that they join from autonomous birthplaces into tight relationship, rather than basically one fitting in with the other.

Intermingling is clear in alphabetic frameworks however not in pictographic frameworks. More tightly affiliation prompts more prominent between impact. Firmly related discourse and composing accomplish shared advantages as composing animates all the more talking and discourse actuates all the more composition. By means of affiliation, discourse sounds came to be a noteworthy wellspring of new word/articulation creation. Some new images are made or acquired to speak to language sounds. Diacritics [5] are added to change sound worth. These progressions make composing speaking to discourse better [6]. As discourse sounds can be spoken to by various composed images/words/stages, the intelligibility (visual shapes) of images/words/stages is considered over for picking wanted ones. During the cooperations among discourse and composing, sounds could influence the arrangement and advancement of composing frameworks.

Be that as it may, the last determinant of its prosperity is the visual decipherability, fit for handling, simple to be retained and systemized. The visual structure, rather than affiliation/cooperation with spoken language, is the focal and deterministic recorded as a hard copy frameworks advancement. Spoken language functions as an extension among importance and composing. It isn’t focal in development process. Despite what might be expected, it joins to its composition framework for survival, development and spread. We estimate that the composition frameworks advance towards progressively readable alphabetic frameworks by methods for visual refinement, during connections with discourse sounds.

The development is entangled by many viable components. Initially, the creation and spread of composing depends on devices, materials, media, for example, pen, paper, printing and these days PC and web. Innovative headway has changed the presence of composing just as the manner in which composing is made, exists and spreads. Furthermore, being solid, existing composed works definitely oppose the composition framework change or new contents selection, progressively composed works, more grounded opposition. At long last, composing framework is utilized by individuals and related with things in a general public. Advancement of composing framework in this manner has to do with the general population and things. Composing framework is related with nation, religion, instruction, economy, law, science, culture, etc.

It spreads and becomes together with them. Composing framework is regularly assigned formally in a nation or area. Its progressions are in this way of administrative, political and even military concerns. These components, discourse and still different variables muddle composing’s history. Composing potentially doesn’t advance along a straight line. By and by, in their intricate improvement history, composing frameworks with more prominent neatness will be embraced by more individuals and win. It is an exceptional accomplishment of writing to consolidate every one of these issues and present outwardly sorted out course of action to people.

4 The accomplishment of Latin letter set and the fate of composed English

As the predominant letter set of present world, Latin letters in order and its frameworks embody the clarity and discourse composing affiliation. It has been utilized for composing various spoken dialects and wins for a significant number of them, paying little respect to what sounds the dialects have. Visual component of its composition frameworks is in charge of its predominance.

Not just alphabetic frameworks supplanted pictographic frameworks, some alphabetic frameworks have supplanted or are overwhelming other alphabetic frameworks. Various letter sets have been hard-tied with their verbally expressed dialects. Maybe all individuals will say their separate letter sets are ideal to speak to their verbally expressed dialects. Be that as it may, basing on clarity, their composition frameworks contend to develop for progress over others. Latin frameworks gain energy in every single alphabetic framework, attacking different frameworks. The prevalence of Latin frameworks is in that they have straightforward and obviously between recognizable letters, syllabic blend of letters and words having coordinated visual attributes. Each letter is all around molded with incredible conspicuousness.

The letters are effectively to be efficiently orchestrated. The ascenders and descenders of lowercase letters in order make letter mixes and words increasingly clear. Much of the time, the capitalized letters are less decipherable and had been supplanted by lowercase letters, in spite of the fact that they speak to same sound as lowercase letters do. On the highest point of Latin frameworks, English sits. The English’s fit for perusing obviously exhibits keeping in touch with itself as opposed to speaking to discourse is critical for a framework to pick up preferred position, as the English composed works grow all around, beating different frameworks, in different discourse networks. With most prominent volumes of composed works and extraordinary neatness, the English composition framework has spread the world over, by means of ways including exchange, scholastics, instruction, war, colonization and most discernible these days – innovative advancement.

Other than direct spread of Latin frameworks, the Latin letter set is utilized to compose dialects initially written in different contents (or none), a procedure called Romanization. Romanization can make new Latin letter sets based framework. For language officially written in another content, a great many people consider Romanized framework and unique framework as a similar language, however. That is maybe because of its direct speaking to unique composition/discourse. In spite of the fact that Romanized framework is taken as unique language, Romanization is in reality Latin letters in order’s development. The first language is attached into Latin frameworks. Romanized framework brings individuals closer to other Latin frameworks. Knowing the Romanized framework, individuals are promptly to learn other Latin frameworks.

Romanization additionally brings new words into existing Latin frameworks, whose speakers utilize some Romanized words as outside words, which would enter local vocabulary after some time. Romanization proceeds because of the neatness of Romanized framework. As existing Latin frameworks spread and develop, Romanization goes on to non-Latin framework areas. Non-Latin frameworks are impossible overwhelmed by Romanized frameworks alone, however it appears they would be overpowered by the general extension of Latin frameworks.

As illustrative of Latin frameworks, English composition framework is becoming through speaking to information, recording discourse sounds and acquiring, among different methods. The pattern of English’s predominance is proceeding. Composed English is utilized by an ever increasing number of individuals in non-local areas and would in the long run be received by all. English will likewise be spoken by more individuals following the spread of composed English [7]. Other composition frameworks might be supplanted, Romanized or exist together with English.

Composed English is efficient. It has 26 letters, built up standards for word-development and sentence structure. Will it develop in essential level, for example its contents, dictionary or language structure? Or on the other hand it will just proceed with development basing on current framework and guidelines? In not so distant future, radical change appears to be far-fetched. English has turned out to be universal language. Without test, its fundamental look would not change. Or maybe, it would develop after existing framework when other language, culture and recently discovered information are spoken to. On the long run, radical change can’t be precluded. Hypothetically, its future can be examined from its visual element and is represented by decipherability rule. As a general rule, the advancement is presently a worldwide procedure with billions of individuals’ support. That is completely extremely intricate. It is formed by works of each person.


  • Non-sound ‘based’ frameworks, for example, logographic framework, frequently contain numerous images not picture-like. They can be dealt with like pictographic framework in that they likewise don’t have settled sign-sound correspondence. We talk about pictographic framework. End can be effectively summed up to other non-sound based frameworks.
  • People more often than not feel the recognizable framework simpler to peruse than new ones. Subsequently, to dissect clarity, commonality ought to be considered.
  • Systems of a similar content can be unique. For example, we consider English framework as an alternate framework from other Latin letter set based frameworks.
  • Writing’s impact on discourse is enormous.
  • It is the English letters in order without (or once in a while use) diacritics wins, inferable from diacritics more often than not exacerbates clarity.
  • The visual qualities of letters in order make them fit for speaking to sounds and can represent the snugness of discourse composing affiliation. Composing develops outwardly towards the alphabetic structures which meanwhile relates more firmly with discourse than pictographs.
  • This is and was presumably the situation for local English-talking nations.

Related Post