We are talking of two things:
1. I do not claim that Etruscans DID come from India. I am only looking for connections, especially on the basis of two things: That their alphabet seems to be a mystery and the Anatolia is connected with them, which is also connected with the Lanka of Ramayana. If I have made such statement, I am really sorry about it.
2. I have made certain comments on Indus people. I stand by that. I was trying to prove that Indus people could be Dardic, just as the Pisaci language was. It is possible that they are Dardic Yaksa community practicing Jain religion.
This hypothesis again was not through linguistics (which is impossible anyway till you know what language Indus people spoke!) but through other deductions. Agreed that these deductions are still in nascent stage, especially since I have to over come the difficulty about Telugu being branded as a Dravidian language. I have to work a lot more on these things, as I keep getting more feed back and criticism from learned members on various groups.
3. Three years ago, I have tried to offer my own layman's code for Indus script. But unfortunately, I have not got any feedback from any quarter. Even negative feed back would help because it will help us to go further answer the criticism and making corrections, if any.
4. So far as Mayans are concerned, I have really taken the Hindu influences on the archeology of the Mayans for granted. The only new hypothesis I was making is the Mayans are from India, belonging to the lineage of Maya. I am too sure that I would be able to prove that or atleast deduce that in a more acceptable way.
Coming to the sanskrit's influence on Mayans, I would certainly make my comments elaborately based on what I have studied. If the reasoning is wrong, you can please point it out.
All said and done, such ideas need to be encouraged, just as this group did , to see the alternative truth. If the ideas are wrong, they may die in the natural course but they will certainly pave the way for seeing things in new light.
The discussions on the group made me work frantically at more and more information that I can get hold of on linguistics.
regards,
kishore patnaik
On Jan 23, 2008 7:02 PM, ualarauans <ualarauans@...> wrote:
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "kishore patnaik"
<kishorepatnaik09@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Ualarauans,
>
> I really cant get you. Did I ever say that I am trying to prove
my hypothesis on the basis of language?
No, you didn't say that. You said that "[t]he sanskrit influences on
Mayans are beyond doubt" adding that "they [sc. Mayans] followed
their own languages and their own traditions".
[http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/51454]
This is really something I can't get. Doesn't the term "Sanskrit"
refer to the LANGUAGE? Now, if you state that the influences of the
Sanskrit language on Mayans are beyond doubt, you must have some
good arguments of purely linguistic nature to support this thesis.
At least I believed so. I asked you to share this knowledge with the
group. And now I am answered that the person who claimed to have
made the greatest linguistic discovery since Prof. Hrozny is in fact
not a linguist (but that doesn't matter) and isn't even "trying to
prove his hypothesis on the basis of language" (sic!!!). I am lost.
> If you read some of my recent messages, unconnected with Mayans,
you will note that I am not a linguist.
And you think that this fact per se authorizes you to make claims
that "Lithuanians are from India", "Etruscans are from India" and
even "Indus people are from India" (which may be not so surprizing
but in this context stinks nevertheless)?
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/51301
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/51275
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/51344
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/51138
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/51123
> sorry if you feel cheated,
Yes, I do. Sorry for being so naive.