Re: Proto Vedic Continuity Theory of Bharatiya (Indian) Languages

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Francesco Brighenti"
<frabrig@...> wrote:

>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
> wrote:
>
> > For this [OIT] scenario to be proven wrong once and for all, it
> should be > proven wrong for any possible value of the parameters
> you ask me to > specify (and the number of possible values for

each

> parameter is > finite and relatively small, so it should be
> practically possible > too). If I had provided any values, you

might

> be able to prove the > scenario wrong for exactly those values,

but

> _not_ (obviously) for > any other given set of parameter values.

So

> the menace of this > scenario being possibly right would live on.
>
>
> Read these first. Then come back.
>
> http://www.bharatvani.org/books/rig/
>

http://users.primushost.com/~india/ejvs/ejvs0702/ejvs0702article.pdf

>

Now I've read them. I get it that Witzel thinks Talageri is an
idiot. What does this have to do with what I said?


Torsten