Hebrew is a closely related semitic language that simply adopted a block and cursive form. It has also been greatly simplified and friendlier towards loanwords, which has made it far easier to learn.
Weird to say Arabic hasn’t innovated or evolved considering the wild variety of dialects spoken in the modern world.
Conflating the language with the script is also bizarre. In terms of adapting Arabic to technology, look into romanized Arabic which was used before Unicode was common.
> Weird to say Arabic hasn’t innovated or evolved considering the wild variety of dialects spoken in the modern world.
I didn't say Arabic has not innovated or evolved; only that it "has lagged behind other languages in terms of innovation". My belief is that that is due to linguistic conservatism, and linked to Islamism (or, at minimum, the centrality of Islam in Arab culture). Also related to this is the existence of Fusha, its place in Arab culture, and its branding as "modern standard Arabic".
I didn't conflate anything. While a script and a language are not the same, it's not a coincidence that Arabic is often written today in a script that is very close to Quranic script. And -- to really kick the hornet's nest -- it's also not a coincidence that there have been so few outstanding Arab writers (in Arabic) in the past 100 years. One novelist and a couple poets.
Now, reading that point one might ask the question if writing has been properly funded, or if the priority of cultural funding in the Arab world has been lower than, say, the funding of architecture and other forms of art. And on top of that, I'd also have a serious look at the market size, especially when compared with English-language writing.
Firstly, the Qur'an wasn't written by the Prophet, he would dictate it and it would be written by his scribes.
Secondly, it's hard to argue that Islam has had a negative effect on Arabic or caused it to lag behind. In fact, it's easy to argue for the opposite. It's a historical fact that the Arabic language developed and proliferated rapidly due to the rise and spread of Islam. This is when its script and grammar were standardized, and when more and more works started being composed. And shortly thereafter the Islamic Golden Age began.
I don't have any issue with Hebrew, and maybe it is easier to learn. But this is because it was a dead language which was revived, resulting in a simplified language. Almost every other major language on Earth will have the same amount of "innovation" as Arabic. In fact, Arabic has many colloquial dialects which are used in day to day conversations, and these do consist of a simplified version with many loanwords. So I really don't know what you mean by a lack of innovation.
But if you compare it with basically any other major language, it’s clearly much, much more conservative. If you are a native English speaker, understanding English from 1,000 years ago is like learning a completely different language. If you are a native speaker of Italian, you cannot understand a text in Latin without significant training. This is true for all European languages other than Icelandic.
Chinese is pretty similar, even though the written language is slightly more stable.
So in comparison, Arabic is incredibly conservative.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varieties_of_Arabic
A rough equivalent in both time and space is how the Vatican continues to use Latin, but the rest of the Roman Empire has splintered into Italian, French, Spanish, Romanian, etc.
They speak it on tv and it's written in newpapers. They learn it in schools. Educated Arabs code switch into Fusha all the time. Islamist leaders (e.g. Nasrallah) speak Fusha in their broadcast speeches.
It's also pretty hard for foreigners to learn an ammiyya (outside of immersion). "Studying Arabic" almost always means Fusha.
I agree with you that "the actual Arabics are the 20-odd spoken languages". In a healhier culture, Fusha wouldn't exist or would have the same cultural place as Latin in the Western world.