What would happen if Linear B remained in use and were adopted by the Romans? Did Linear B have more characters than the later Greek alphabet? If so, would that mean less literacy in Rome and during the rest of Western history given that it's harder to learn?
Linear B is not fully understood and seems to share a lot of its alphabet with Linear A. Most of the signs don't seem to be sounds but ideograms ie concepts. It also never seems to have been in widespread use by merchants and the like as its only ever been found in palace complexes. So anything goes, no one has enough information to say what impact it would have.What would happen if Linear B remained in use and were adopted by the Romans? Did Linear B have more characters than the later Greek alphabet? If so, would that mean less literacy in Rome and during the rest of Western history given that it's harder to learn?
You've got it backwards. Linear B is well understood, and is a syllabary for writing Greek. It's Linear A that we don't understand.Linear B is not fully understood and seems to share a lot of its alphabet with Linear A. Most of the signs don't seem to be sounds but ideograms ie concepts. It also never seems to have been in widespread use by merchants and the like as its only ever been found in palace complexes. So anything goes, no one has enough information to say what impact it would have.
Going on other languages we would expect simplification over time but its guesses piled on guesses. Since the Romans did not use the Greek alphabet OTL and Latin has different sounds, to keep Linear B would seem to need to change Latin massively. As for literacy, it would make no difference, the limited number of people who were literate, would handle the increase in characters without noticing it ( East Asian languages don't suffer from being more complex to write )
Not quite, we can get a translation into Greek but certain things require you to guess/assume ( stops are a feature of Mycenaean Greek but Linear B does not deal with them properly ). Some of the symbols we are unsure of what sound they represent or if some are just variants/older forms. It does not help that a lot of the symbols are very similar to those used in Linear A. It does feel that Linear B is using an alphabet that was not designed for Greek, but for the , as yet unknown, Linear A, which is why its use was so restricted and later disappears.You've got it backwards. Linear B is well understood, and is a syllabary for writing Greek. It's Linear A that we don't understand.
There are problems reading Linear B sometimes, but AIUI that's more because (as you say) Linear B isn't well-suited to writing Ancient Greek than because we don't understand it.Not quite, we can get a translation into Greek but certain things require you to guess/assume ( stops are a feature of Mycenaean Greek but Linear B does not deal with them properly ). Some of the symbols we are unsure of what sound they represent or if some are just variants/older forms. It does not help that a lot of the symbols are very similar to those used in Linear A. It does feel that Linear B is using an alphabet that was not designed for Greek, but for the , as yet unknown, Linear A, which is why its use was so restricted and later disappears.
We can assume that the characters would be simplified and easier to write as time goes by. Our letters developed in that way OTL. There could easily be developed ways to write consonants followed by no vowel, and ways to distinguish consonants better, such as d t th and b p ph, so it would not be exactly like the Mycenaean Linear B, but rather Linear C or D or E.What would happen if Linear B remained in use and were adopted by the Romans? Did Linear B have more characters than the later Greek alphabet? If so, would that mean less literacy in Rome and during the rest of Western history given that it's harder to learn?