For the writing of this Latino language, would the Arabic alphabet or the Latin one be used, or sill it depends of the religion of the user (Christians use Latin, apart maybe those living in the South, while Muslims use Arabic, except maybe those living in the North)?
 
For the writing of this Latino language, would the Arabic alphabet or the Latin one be used, or sill it depends of the religion of the user (Christians use Latin, apart maybe those living in the South, while Muslims use Arabic, except maybe those living in the North)?

They'd certainly use the Perso-Arabic script with a few added letter, though some would presumably use the Latin script.
 
For those discussing the language. The Arabic script wound be absolutely terrible for a Romance based language. There simply is not enough vowels and or distinctions to make it worthwhile. It would be much like pre modern Turkish and likely have to switch to a modified Latin alphabet instead of using the abjad which is tailored for Semitic languages.

Either way, imagining a language that keeps the characteristics of Latin and then giving it Arabic and the abjad, would be very cumbersome indeed.
 
For those discussing the language. The Arabic script wound be absolutely terrible for a Romance based language. There simply is not enough vowels and or distinctions to make it worthwhile. It would be much like pre modern Turkish and likely have to switch to a modified Latin alphabet instead of using the abjad which is tailored for Semitic languages.

Either way, imagining a language that keeps the characteristics of Latin and then giving it Arabic and the abjad, would be very cumbersome indeed.

I don't know much about the Arabic script but Spanish got the grand total of 5 different vowels.
To transcript Portuguese would effectively be a much harder task. I wonder what mozarabic looked like in comparison to those two.
 
I don't know much about the Arabic script but Spanish got the grand total of 5 different vowels.
To transcript Portuguese would effectively be a much harder task. I wonder what mozarabic looked like in comparison to those two.

Well, that's only counting basic vowels without diacritics. Arabic would need to display these by creating new haraqaat, or vowel marks for all of these. Notice, there are already other types of diacritics used for supplements. This mind you would not include diphthongs, which the abjad would need to represent.

The same sort of issue occurred with Turkish which had too many vowels to really use the abjad. Abjads, while are the original alphabets, are not effective for non Semitic languages at the end of the day. I would suggest either you drop the abjad and simply use an alphabet with the Arabic script (with vowels as letters and diacritics for vowels not represented) or the language use Latin alphabet and then either use diacritics or spell out methods for Arabic inclusions.

So a question would be how does it represent, Semitic oddities such as ا the fall of Arabic L2 learners? You can use ā or how I typically write it transliterated, as aa.

There also should be a discussion as to the Arabic dual. Would this language adopt a dual in addition to the plural and singular? If so, that would be interesting. In this case, English would go best as a creole with Arabic as English has a sort of latent dual if I am not mistaken.
 
Last edited:
Hi

I'm going on the premise that the Latino speakers are divided by religion, with Catholics viewing Romance derived words and grammar as high register while Muslims view Arabic as the high variety. Jews prefer Arabic and Hebrew roots and are prolific writers in Arabic.
There is a movement within the christian population of de-arabizing their language but their moves for more cultural autonomy are associated with separatism and in extreme cases with terrorism. Their origins are for the large part the same as the rest of the Muslim population but at some point there was a brief period of unrest in the Christian Kingdom of Castille (which is based on the northern Iberian coast around Oviedo) and many christians claimed asylum in the United Emirates of Granada where they were housed in villages with existing Christian populations. The native Granadan (the name for all citizens of the Emirates of Granada) christians began adopting the name Castillian and their language became influenced by northern Castillian dialects (including elements of Asturian) and there was a move for literacy programs in the Latin script. Currently, in 21st century the language varieties of the "Castillians of Granada" are endangered and there are several linguistic revitalisation programs due to modern multiculturalist policies in the democratised Emirates. The movement for revitalisation does remain, in legal terms, limited to linguisitic domains. All villagers, and only Christian villages are entitled to Latino medium education, whereas all villagers speak varieties of Latino to various levels, first language speakers remain at about 60% of the rural population, and it is variously effected by language contact with local and standardised Arabic.

They'd certainly use the Perso-Arabic script with a few added letter, though some would presumably use the Latin script.

As for the alphabet, Arabic is the prefered script, and in fact literacy in Latino is poor as most people, including Christians write in standard Arabic. There does exist an Arabic based script for Latino and it goes like this:

یسقریبیه‌ندو ین لاتینواۆرا، ا به‌ر سی می ینتیه‌نده‌ش؟
 
Top