From: kishore patnaik
Message: 60828
Date: 2008-10-12
On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 12:12 PM, kishore patnaik <kishorepatnaik09@...> wrote:
I certainly anticipate what your theory could be - it will be a replica of Dumezil.
But you don;t seem to be understanding the contradictions - you said Varuna is an Indic God, but Dumezil insists on the pair system everywhere- with Mitra is being present at least in some IE.
Go by facts and logic, not by your beliefs and French brother hood connections.
Kishore patnaikOn Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Arnaud Fournet <fournet.arnaud@...> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: kishore patnaikTo: cybalist@yahoogroups.com========
Well, couple of people accepting does not amount to much, especially by
people like Mallory, who is being questioned nowadays.
By whom ?
Even though he is mainly an archeologist, I don't think He is very far from
the standard white line in the middle of the road.
Arnaud
=================
> I don;t know what you mean by hit and run?
You are trying to explain each deity and each theonym like a huge collection
of unrelated entities.
The reason why Dumezil's approach is so strong is the relationships between
the entities matter as much as the entities themselves.
You fail to understand that.
Arnaud
====================
> What I can not understand is you are not actually questioning my theory at
> all.
Your "theory" is obviously inadequate.
Wrong method, wrong premices, wrong results.
No improvement on previous theories.
Arnaud
==========
All of you are questioning the "mainstream" theories which I have quoted.
You are questioning Mcdonnell et al and not Kishore patnaik.
MacDonnel is two centuries old,
Why don't you choose something even older to make sure it's even more
outdated ?
Arnaud
===============
> May be you have a theory your self. based on your singular hero Dumezil?
> Kishore patnaik
Yes, I do.
Arnaud
========