>one could become quite proficient at reading (without any comprehension of what they are reading)
If you can't comprehend what you're reading, you're not reading. Learning the Korean alphabet is not learning Korean.
If you can't comprehend what you're reading, you're not reading. Learning the Korean alphabet is not learning Korean.
FWIW, only one dictionary definition I can find includes "comprehend" in the definition and it still falls under other definitions such as "speaking aloud written or printed material to other people".
I never claimed it was. My post was very specifically about learning to read and write Hangul.
With Hangul, you can start writing your own name, lot of English words in Korean which is understood in Korea. Even Konglish (Phonetically typed Korean in English) is understood to a certain degree.
Anything beyond that, you will need to learn the Korean words, but it gets you a lot farther than most languages.
No I don't have scientific evidence to support this but from anecdotal experiences. Somebody wants to write a paper on it let me know, I'll give you 0.1 bitcoin.
Learning the Latin alphabet doesn't mean you have learnt to read English.
And sure of course you can learn the Arabic alphabet quickly. It's a lot simpler than it looks.