If you're talking about Rashi script, Rashi never used it himself. The different font was used by printers to distinguish between commentary and text.
They use different alphabets
It was pictograms which depicted syllables. We use alphabetic writing which males the sounds clear.
It was pictograms which depicted syllables. We use alphabetic writing which males the sounds clear.
You can use a base other than 10. Such as binary or hexedecimal or scientific notation. You can also write it out in English or the language of your choice.
There's not general agreement on this. The official position is to use from, but in some cases this doesn't seem just right. For example: "John is different than he was yesterday" seems more correct.
The Japanese use three writing systems: hiragana (cursive), katakana (print), and kanji (borrowed from the Chinese).
The correct syntax would be "different kinds of fuel".
Their language was Semitic, different from Greek and Latin. A few words were absorbed into those languages. They invented cursive writing, different from symbols and pictographs of Egyptian and Mesopotamian writings which were syllabic and not adapted to easy use. Their alphabet formed the basis of modern writing.
Absolutely! The tone of writing you use for a informative essay cannot be used for a persuasive essay, and vice versus. Plus, there's formal and informal, and more! The style of writing you use for a project is almost as unique as the project itself.
Not only did all of the Romance languages evolve from Latin, but in the 19th century, some English grammarians decided that Latin was the perfect language and decided to rewrite the rules of English to make it more like Latin. So, such rules as not putting prepositions at the ends of sentences and not splitting infinitives (though that one does get disregarded in more poetic English. Star Trek wouldn't be the same without it) come straight out of Latin. Generally, with Romance languages and English, that which is considered to be better grammar is more closely related to Latin.
nothing
beyond plus In addition