From: Rick McCallister
Message: 57673
Date: 2008-04-19
>Sanskrit was not developed until after the Indo-Aryans
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kishore patnaik" <kishorepatnaik09@...>
> To: <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, April 19, 2008 6:25 PM
> Subject: [Courrier indésirable] [tied] Re: Ban all
> non academic discussions
>
>
> -
> >
> >> Since when do you think Sanscrit or Vedic
> Sanscrit has been spoken,
> >> under the phonetic and morphology form that we
> know it to be ?
> >> Before Present - 3000, - 4000, - 5000, more,
> > >
> >> Arnaud
>
>
>
> >Some people would want the Vedic sanskrit to be
> placed in post Mitanni
> >days, that will make it hardly 3200 year old but
> they neglect that the
> >sanskrit words used by Mitannis (panza, satta etc)
> used both pre and
> >post vedic sanskrit words- if panza is pre vedic,
> then certainly Satta
> >is post vedic.
> >In any case, this goes to preclude the role of Ir.
> >Kishore patnaik
> =========
> I think you are compounding two questions together.
> Q1. When and where was Rg Veda composed and hence
> when and where was Vedic
> Sanscrit spoken ?
> Q2. What do the indo-iranian-looking words in
> Mittani texts learn us about
> Indo-iranian ?
>
> I'm not sure we can preclude Iranian or early
> Iranian as a source of Mittani
> "Aryanoid" ?
> Or what are the reasons we can do that ?
>
> Do you accept -4000 BP as the earliest datation
> possible for Sanscrit ?
>
> Arnaud
>
> ============