|
 |
Cursive Cyrillic | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
 Iversen Super Polyglot Moderator Denmark berejst.dk Joined 6707 days ago 9078 posts - 16473 votes  Speaks: Danish*, French, English, German, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Esperanto, Romanian, Catalan Studies: Afrikaans, Greek, Norwegian, Russian, Serbian, Icelandic, Latin, Irish, Lowland Scots, Indonesian, Polish, Croatian Personal Language Map | Message 17 of 22 09 August 2011 at 11:19am | IP Logged | ||
|
I learned cursive writing in school, and I hated it because it already seemed totally idiotic to cultivate a writing style that was as far removed from printed text as possible. So obviously I abandoned it as soon as I left elementary school, but the result was a writing style that fluctuates between isolated letters and letters connected in every possible way except those prescribed by my teachers and the books they used to indoctrinate us. Greek letters entered one by one through physics and mathematics, so they were disconnected from the start, and when I decided to learn Greek and (later) Russian it was clear that I would try to emulate the printed letters. After all, the only situations where I might need to read handwritten Greek or Russian would be at markets during my travels, and there the price is usually enough - after all, an apple is an apple. In other words the Russians, Serbians etc. are welcome to write Cyrillic cursive, it won't affect my language learning to any noticeable extent. Edited by Iversen on 09 August 2011 at 11:20am 3 persons have voted this message useful | |||
| Doitsujin Diglot Senior Member Germany Joined 5324 days ago 1256 posts - 2363 votes Speaks: German*, English | Message 19 of 22 09 August 2011 at 1:39pm | IP Logged | ||
Do you write your letters like the printed letters in the first row or do you use the handwritten letters and just don't connect them? (I actually find most cursive Cyrillic letters easier to write than their printed counterparts.) 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| s0fist Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5050 days ago 260 posts - 445 votes Speaks: Russian*, English Studies: Sign Language, German, Spanish, French | Message 21 of 22 09 August 2011 at 9:50pm | IP Logged | ||
After trying the top and bottom covered comparison on written Russian, it seems to me that it doesn't matter which part you cover, top or bottom, but with differing results. For cursive Russian, the message becomes incomprehensible fairly quickly (depending on how much you cover of course in relation to the midline). On the other hand, for printed Russian, the result is evidently the same but opposite in that it doesn't matter where you start, top or bottom, the message is comprehensible for a good while (again depending on how much of the print you cover). Which to me just seems to suggest that for different languages and different scripts different parts of various symbols are key to understanding. This is natural, it seems all languages include a good portion of content that is not crucial to meaning, but might be important as supplementary or corroborative information that is only needed when things go awry (not knowing a word, a word being misspelled, bad handwriting, and so on). This information is not necessarily split, I don't think, between the top and bottom, but rather just here and there, depending on the language, the script, and various other artifacts (handwriting, word shape characteristics, etc). Interesting article indeed. Made me think about the typoglycemia article I read some years back, just another curiousity. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| egill Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 5700 days ago 418 posts - 791 votes Speaks: Mandarin, English* Studies: German, Spanish, Dutch | Message 22 of 22 10 August 2011 at 1:15am | IP Logged | ||
|
I'm not saying that everything they're saying is right and we should switch to italic
hand. In fact I personally use cursive writing almost exclusively (switching to print only when people complain), but I do think my choice is one borne more out of habit than any logical criteria. Yes of course, sloppiness can make any hand illegible, but I don't think that means we can't ever compare anything. The question is ceteris paribus which one is more legible? That is given the same amount of effort and same speed is one more or less legible? I think some of their claims do make sense. I will certainly admit their example is quite contrived: no one writes cursive like that. However to a lesser extent, I think that many of the extra loops I make, do ultimately detract from the legibility of my writing, and are plain unnecessary. Finally, I find the general attitude of looking down on other people for using print, as being childish, lazy, or trying to be fashionable misguided. I can't speak for the whole world, but at least where I live, people use print simply because it's easier. Full stop. Me using cursive doesn't automatically make me any more mature, diligent, nor independent minded. It just means I wiggle my pen in a different way. 1 person has voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
