"Furthark" or "Runes" are indeed the precursors of later German(-ic) writing, i.e. "Latin" alphabet. Yet why Paweł's analogy between Polish, Slovene etc.. using non-Cyrillic vs. Russian using Cyrillic misses the mark, is precisely because OTHER extant Slavic languages have always been using Cyrillic as a perfectly viable means of writing. This was never the case with either English, German, Swedish, Dutch etc.. or any extant Germanic language, all of which (certainly in modern times, e.g. since around 1200AD) have been using those recognizable Latin letters as their "alphabet". Any text examined from the Furthark period onward, will reveal that the latter was clearly given up after a certain period of time. Russian, Serbian, and the rest continue to use Cyrillic as they have since time immemorial!
Whilst on the subject of Western/European writing systems though, excluding Turkish (which used the Arab script until Ataturk!!), Albanian, as I recall, used the Galogothic (??) script until the late Middle Ages. There are also some other separate examples which I presently cannot recall-:))
Grubas, "opanować" would have been my other choice, but I made an honest error, undoubtedly a language transference glitch from the German "eine Sprache BEHERRSCHEN". Sound familiar?LOL
In your English, as I reminded Wulkan, try to limit your use of conventional slang. It'd be in the reverse as if I were trying to impress you with my Polish by writing "poszłem" for "poszedłem" or "Rusz dupe!" rather than "Przepraszam!" etc.. It's never 'cool' to be rude (....even in English)
Oh, yes. I should add that while Icelandic, not to mention the other four Scandinavian languages (except of course for Finnish, but INCLUDING Faeroese!) has several "extra" letters, such as the thorn(s), ligatures, plus the Swedish umlauts, .., it still uses the same alphabet as we do and has done so for almost a thousand years:-)