just finished watching a documentary about book printing and it's effect in broad historic and social context.
And I was caught so off-guard by this one woman saying that Gutenberg "was the first who broke up words into letters" (which sounds less odd in english because letters mean both the physical typographic stamps and the concept of the letter (and also the collection of letters that one sends to a friend - wild, actually)).
I had to stop and vocalize my thought that she basically said he invented the alphabet, which is not correct, to then think about it for a few minutes before continuing the video.
And you know what? She's not wrong. She's also not right.
The thing is, the alphabet existed pre-Gutenberg. Otherwise there would have been no books in the first place. BUT what he did was that he uniformed HOW things were written.
Up to that point, some monk or scribe was taught how the alphabet and letters work and then sent on his way. How something (or someone) was written was entirely up to the person who wrote it.
But with the printing press, words began to get a uniformed spelling; now it was no longer up to the person who physically wrote the thing, at least in theory.
So, it's not wrong that Gutenberg is responsible for today's base of grammar and spelling. If there was no printing press, people would write things the way they felt like.
I think I just developed a way bigger empathy for kidteens dyslexia...