--- In cybalist@..., "P&G" <petegray@...> wrote:
> >Prof. Satya Swarup Misra.> > I have met the work of Prof Misra on
laryngeals and in some other areas, and> in my humble opinion, he is
one of those whose utterances remind us that> academic speech is
indeed free in more than one sense.
Would it be unreasonable to suggest that a recent book (late 1999)
containing 10 lectures by another professsor also belonging to a
Dept. of Linguistics (but in an Indian university) should be read
first to evaluate if he has argued his case well?
How can an issue be prejudged just by the name of the author?
Shouldn't the author be given a hearing first? He has argued his
views using linguistics which is his profession.
Is the refusal to hear or read because he comes to conclusions which
run counter to the views expressed by some other linguists? So what?
As a non-linguist, but one interested in ancient civilizations, I
feel puzzled by the absence of an agreed framework among linguists to
argue on -- or at least discuss -- issues (e.g migrations of words)
calmly.
One says Sanskrit 'a' is old and another says no.