Re: Prakrits (was Re: [tied] Non-lexical language trees)

> That is right, Peter. Both Samskr.tam and Pra_kr.ts could have co-
> existed.

We know they did, at a later stage.

>Gautama Buddha and Maha_vi_ra spoke in Pra_kr.ts (Hybrid
> Samskr.tam and Pali).

If you use the word "Prakrit" on a language list, you ought to mean by it
what the rest of the world does. Sanskrit + Pali does not = Prakrit any
more than Latin + Celtic = French.

> The point I wanted to make was that non-lexical language trees
> should not exclude writing systems

The trouble is, a writing system can be used for any language. The fact
that Maori is written in Latin letters does not make it related to English.

Peter