I knew someone would reply with this.
I kind of doubt that, otherwise you would have actual counter arguments instead of replying with made up garbage that relies on having no understanding of how languages are lost to believe, to try and force your incorrect perspective.
but if you examine how these works deal with the whole "ancient language" trope,
Never decide how one story works based on how other fictional stories work. Only use what the author has said in the story.
you see that half the world is made of ruins (or equivalent) with this language written everywhere.
Which is only relevant if it is ruins in a single language, as opposed to a multitude of different languages, like you would expect in most worlds, unless they introduce something to state everything was the same language assume there are multiple languages present, normally 1 per nation/civilization.
but here and in other comics it is never the case and there is always a group of intellectuals studying the ancient ruins or whatever.
Which means exactly nothing. The only thing this statement does is demonstrate you have no clue how language death and studying ancient languages work, but are arrogant enough to make claims with no knowledge or understanding because you feel you are right, but do not want to actually verify you are right like an adult.
Though there were plenty of scholars studying ancient heirogriphics, they made no progress until the Rosetta stone was found. It is literally the item that made the language translatable and readable. Even then it took a lot of effort to do so. That is why the Rosetta stone is famous, and so historically valuable. The argument you are trying to make requires that things not work the way that this language, which means it is wrong, made worse since this example that demonstrates its failure was mentioned in the post you are replying to. so it is just made up BS with no actual attempt to touch what you were replying to.
The ting is without a reference ot start from, how much material you have access to does next to nothing.
There are plenty of lost languages because we do not have that reference point. There is absolutely no logical argument around this, there needs to be a reference point of some form or the deciphering will never start, even a descendent spoken language is not good enough unless the written language is also a descendent of that written language, which might or might not be enough to get some progress due to the similarities.
But the point you are really missing is that losing all points of reference for a language can take very little time. 1-2 generations is more then feasible, especially if some disaster was involved.
If something destroys civilization, or makes resources scarce, it could easily lead to people not teaching their kids to read and write, especially if it is a complicated system which a bunch of ancient civilizations on earth used (like Egypt) partly to keep writing and reading out of the hands of commoners, which leads to the knowledge of how to read the language dies once the last survivor who knew it dies. Eventually a new system likely develops with no direct connection to the old. If something makes it so survival is the sole priority for a generation or 2 this type of loss becomes very easy as reading is not a skill necessary for survival, so falls to the lower end of the priorities to teach your kids. Especially if they have to contribute from a young age.
There are several examples of South and Central american languages we can not properly or fully translate, due to how much the Spanish destroyed when they invaded the region. The people survived, but a lot of knowledge was lost and with it some of the writing systems that were in place there.
The latin alphabet is actually pretty easy to learn, the biggest issue with english is all the grammar rules and spellings which are more recent. When they talk about the low literacy rates in medieval times, that is because they only counted literacy in Latin, not in your native language, and there is plenty of evidence that even the farmers and villagers were able to read the language they spoke to some extent by writing the letters for the sounds of words, meaning 2 people could spell the same word different ways. This makes it so the writing system is harder to lose, but the language, grammar rules and proper spellings could all easily be lost or lessened should disaster come.
The more complicated systems like Kanji take more time and energy to learn so are more vulnerable to complete loss from disaster.
The other issue is that a lot of the examples and reference documents for a language on how to read one using knowledge of another would often be written on some form of paper, and how long paper lasts depends heavily on the conditions it is stored in. stored properly and you can get centuries to millenia, stored improperly and you are lucky to get decades.
We also still do not know what happened over that 1000 years but if his old name is not known and they are referring to it as an ancient language, and not the name of the language, as well as the loss of magic theory, then that would imply some sort of major civilization resetting disaster or war occuring.
My guess based on the magic loss would be something made it unusable for a while. IIRC That is part of what happened in
Magi Craft Meister I can not remember if it is covered the Manga yet or not, but certain events caused the ambient magic levels of that world to massively drop, this killed all the magic users above a certain level, and all their knowledge went with them because it was not all written down (writing down all the instructions and procedures is pretty recent in our world, which is why there is a lot of lost knowledge in professions that required apprenticeships or on the job training).
It is therefore impossible that a mere one thousand years old goes extinct in these conditions and that is what I find funny.
Except it is not impossible, you just do not understand language death at all, that and we do not know the F-ing conditions yet so you can not intelligently make any claims of the conditions.
You are making up conclusions with 0 evidence or logic to support them then claiming you are right.