An assessment of the Unicode standard

[r]

On Aug 30, 7:11 am, Hendrik van Rooyen <hend... at microcorp.co.za>
wrote:
(snip)
> I suspect that the alphabet is not ideal for representing the sounds of _any_
> language, and I would look for my proof in the plethora of things that we use
> when writing, other than the bare A-Z.   - Punctuation, diacritics...

It can be made better and if that means add/removing letters or
redefining what a letter represents i am fine with that. I know first
hand the hypocrisy of the English language. I am thinking more on the
lines of English redux!

> Not that I agree that it would be a Utopia, whatever the language  - more like
> a nightmare of Orwellian proportions - because the language you get taught
> first, moulds the way you think.  And I know from personal experience that
> there are concepts that can be succinctly expressed in one language, that
> takes a lot of wordy handwaving to get across in another.  So diversity would
> be less, creativity would suffer due to lack of cross pollination, and
> progress would slow or stop.

We already live in a Orwellian language nightmare. Have you seen much
change to the English language in your lifetime? i haven't. A language
must constantly evolve and trim the excess cruft that pollutes it. And
English has a mountain of cruft! After all our years on this planet i
think it's high time to perfect a simplified language for world-wide
usage.