Why are you so fond of stupidly obscure symbols that no modern person uses, anyway?
¶ Because they have purpose; just because they are not popular does not make them worthless. The ampersand is certainly not obscure (what else do ye have on your 6 key?).
Oh, and I can tell you a reason for why fewer and fewer different symbols are used, and symbols like this so-called ampersand end up being forgotten: symplicity [sic]. The simpler a language is, the easier it is for more people to gain access to it.
¶ How does reducing the inventory of lettres make a language simple? For the record, autient Latin had about 21 symbols with no lower‐case forms as well as no diacritics. Does not sound complicated to me.
English is quite possibly the most popular language in the world, for good reason: it's simple and efficient. It uses the simplest set of letters in the world, has easy-to-learn grammar and treats all objects as genderless.
¶ No, Rotokas
likely deserves credit as the simplest set of lettres, but it is not an extremely popular language. I think ye might think it has simple grammar because your mother tongue is Germanic as well. How do ye know that English is popular because it is simple and not of œconomic dominance of English speakers, who carry that English with them?
Compare this to languages like Japanese, for example, which use an extremely complex and large set of thousands of symbols for things that we can more efficiently recreate with our (in comparison) tiny alphabet. It's incredibly difficult to learn Japanese, Chinese and similar languages, just because of the sheer amount of different symbols you need to memorize to do so.
So why do millions of people learn it as well as speak it ﬂuently?
Symbols like the ampersand aren't needed - we can express exactly the same in normal letters. That's probably why it was abandoned and forgotten.
¶ So why was in popular in languages like Latin, French, English & cetera
? How does the ampersand complicate things even though it requires less effort to make?
To paraphrase Shade, since you're interested in language, you obviously know that languages develop over time and things change, usually for the sake of simplicity. I'm looking at your post right now and I see you used a lot of old, generally forgotten symbols and expressions. I can also deduct from that, that your post took a lot longer to write than if you had simply written everything in plain modern English.
¶ My post could have been quicker to write if I utilized (inane) acronyms or if I subtracted all the vowels. There are many ways English could be simpliﬁed; why don’t we simplify it more‐so now?
The ampersand may be a lot quicker to write than "and", but in handwriting, I always found it hard to write it well and make it look good. Thus whenever I attempted to write it, it would always take the same, or even more time, than simply writing "and", and would not always come off clear. I think most people had this problem and that is why it was phased out.
Were ye taught how to write it in your school?