[tied] Re: Sanskrit and e, a, o

From: wtsdv
Message: 12898
Date: 2002-03-27

--- In cybalist@..., "michael_donne" <michael_donne@...> wrote:
>
> > Misra apparently once subscribed to the scientifically-sound
> > view. It makes you wonder if he hasn't being motivated by the
> > present political atmosphere in India, especially when we hear
> > such disturbing news as that of N. S. Rajaram's inclusion in
> > the Indian Council of Historical Research.
>
> Misra passed away some time ago.
>
> Please don't automatically assume that anyone who strongly believes
> in the Indigenous Aryan theory is also a Hindu nationalist fanatic.

Actually I didn't assume, I wondered, and not if Misra were a Hindu
nationalist fanatic or not, but if he actually did strongly believe
in the Indigenous Aryan theory, since he didn't appear to subscribe
to it earlier. What I actually feared was that he might have sold
out. It was a relief to read in your other post that he didn't
approve of his views being co-opted for political purposes.

> It is insulting to those who distance themselves from that and
> does nothing to further the scholarly debate.

Equally insulting are accusations of racism or eurocentrism of
the sort that were made at myself on the IndianCivilization list,
along with requests to the moderator to ban me, for arguing against
the indigenist theory, but I can't remember you having asked anybody
on that list not to make assumptions. (:

> Linguistic theories should be judged solely on the merits (or
> lack of merits, in this case) of the arguments and not on any
> presumed "hidden agenda" which is irrelevant to historical
> linguistics anyway; although it is certainly pertinent to a
> current affairs newsgroup.

Besides I.E. linguistics itself, the history of the field and its
scholars are also sometimes discussed on this list, including the
motivation behind what are considered to have been mistakes made
by them. Also, I didn't offer my speculation on Misra in place
of critical analysis of the flaws in his ideas, but in addition
to it, most recently Piotr's, but also after making an attempt
myself to explain what's wrong with some of his ideas. Likewise
I again can't help comparing threads on the IndianCivilization list
in which the legitimacy of the whole field of I.E. linguistics was
called into question based on the prejudices and biases of Max
Müller and other early scholars. Here again I can't remember you
urging anybody on that list to judge solely on the merits or not
to presume a hidden agenda. (:

> Thanks everyone for taking the time!

You're welcome!

David