From: shivkhokra
Message: 70088
Date: 2012-09-22
>What is the evidence for classical sanskrit not being a direct descendant of Vedic Sanskrit?
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Rick McCallister <gabaroo6958@> wrote:
>
> > Sanskrit didn't appear until long after the invasion of India. I'm
> > guessing c. 500 BCE, shortly before writing made its way to India.
> > Old Indian was previously spoken. Before Old Indian, Indo-Iranian
> > was spoken perhaps 500 years before the invasion of India but
> > others know much more than I do.
>It is not a direct descendant of Vedic Sanskrit, but of some other Old Indic dialect(s) spoken in NW South Asia in the same time Vedic Sanskrit was spoken there.
>
> All this is unbeknownst to our Shivraj, who continues to equate Vedic Sanskrit and Epic/Classical Sanskit as if they were one and the same language.Reminding you again that you are putting words in my mouth. Please show where I have written this.
>
>Indeed, when you, Richard, wrote "Sanskrit is a fully developed court language and could only have developed after a group of Indo-Aryans formed a sophisticated polity" (a sentence with which I agree), Shivraj immediately asked, "Whose court? What kings do we have between the steppes and India before Aryans invaded India?", thus, showing he does not understand what you're talking about.Why don't you tell us in what court or "polity" did Vedic Sanskrit and Classical Sanskrit develop in since you agree with "Sanskrit is a fully developed *court* language and could only have developed after a group of Indo-Aryans formed a sophisticated *polity*".
>
>