Re: India first (Was: Etruscans)
From: Piotr Gasiorowski
On 2008-01-22 07:47, kishore patnaik wrote:
> Btw, I envisage today's scientist to be paranoic and your mail seems to
> be proving the point once more.
> Can you please explain why the thesis Mayans are connected to
> India(which have undeniable archeaological and some linguistic
> evidence) will destabilitze your theory that PIE has come from
> Uzbekistan or wherever?
Of course it would not destabilise anything and nobody here is
eveluating it in this light. It's absurd on its own, not because it goes
against somebody's favourite scenario of IE origins (a completly
different and unrelated issue).
What's the linguistic evidence? The fact that a name like "Maya" occurs
here and there? Such a fact does not constitute evidence of anything in
linguistics. I've given you a link to a dictionary of Classical Maya.
Please show us the linguistic evidence of contacts with
Sanskrit-speakers, which, as you claim, is "beyond doubt". Such evidence
is obvious and indeed indubitable e.g. in Malay and Indonesian.
What's the "undeniable archaeological evidence"?