Maybe reflect on what made you think that a nation would just scratch more than a thousand years of culture so that it is easier for facebook engineers to encode their web page. Have no other comment, really.
There are plenty of other examples of countries switching to a new alphabet, even when it would cut people off from their history. Turkish being a prime example. It has nothing to do with making life easier for Facebook engineers and I’m not sure what that has to do with anything. It has everything to do with what real people do in their daily lives, and what government institutions mandate.
These sarcastic replies are so tiresome and intellectually uncurious.
When met with extreme obliviousness, sarcasm is the only escape of the mind.
Turkey switched lots of things as a deliberate act of cutting off with its past, including form of government, constitution, and legitimacy model, and after losing wars and territories for centuries. The fact that you disregard the context to arrive at the desired conclusion might have something to do with the intellectual difficulties you find yourself in.
You can’t seem to leave any comment without adding some sort of sarcastic rude put down, which really isn’t in the nature of this site, nor is it conducive for having an interesting discussion about the future of language. Learn some manners and try again, this time with actual arguments.
Your example using Turkish isn't that good. Turkic languages like Turkish or Kazakh switched to a latin alphabet because the arabic or cyrillic writing systems didn't suit them. The cyrillic script was explicitly created for slavic languages, so there's no need for slavic languages to switch to a latin based alphabet.
Turkish switched to the Latin alphabet and thereby cut itself off from over a thousand years of history and interaction with the Islamic world via Persian and Arabic. This decision was made more for political reasons, as Ätaturk wanted to Westernize the country, than for strictly linguistic ones.
Atatürk also commented on one occasion that the symbolic meaning of the reform was for the Turkish nation to "show with its script and mentality that it is on the side of world civilisation".[26] The second president of Turkey, İsmet İnönü further elaborated the reason behind adopting a Latin alphabet: "The alphabet reform cannot be attributed to ease of reading and writing. That was the motive of Enver Pasha. For us, the big impact and the benefit of an alphabet reform was that it eased the way to cultural reform. We inevitably lost our connection with Arabic culture."
Ok, and just because a few countries did it, in what way implies that Bulgaria will? Your arguments have no basis other than "Country A did it, so Bulgaria is also more likely to do it".
Ok. Well I’ve written a few long comments on why I think it is plausible, but you and the other commenter don’t seem to have actual responses, just insults. Hence this conversation is a waste of time.
