Re: Linguistics On Vedic Issue is a Lame Duck Tool

From: Bhrihskwobhloukstroy
Message: 71448
Date: 2013-10-20

Don't mix up things. I you had read my messages you'd know the
hypothesis I support is continuity of Vedic in India from
Proto-Indo-European times, dating of PIE back to First Peopling and
genetic connection between Indo-European, Dravidian, and
Austro-Asiatic (among other families). What you've written down, on
the contrary, are precisely the word Colonialists would like you to
utter, so that thay can conclude "Do you see? Our opponents don't have
any linguistic training and are proud of it". This clearly proves you
are acting against the side you claim to support, and this is
particularly disappointing. You simply adopt the Colonialist attitude
and grotesquely substitute it to any linguistically based Theory of
continuity in India. I just hope no List-Member - except rotten
Colonialists, of course - will be so stupid to believe you represent
anything but your own dirt play. There will be no mercy for you

2013/10/20, Lalit Mishra <litsol@...>:
> You mean Science ?
>
> Do you  know that makers of Vedas have given you and the world the term
> 'science' that we call 'Vigyan', if you or your witzel or f brighenti or
> this brian scott or eist or any body among you, opens up Rigveda, wd come to
> know about that term "Vigyan" is used at least twice in Rigveda, Your witzel
> could not learn all such things even spending years and depsite inching on
> the verge of retirement, what you bad mouth can tell ?
>
> You have no idea that you are living in bottomless pool of ignorance when it
> comes to deal with Vedas and knowledge treasured in Vedas, You have only one
> choice that you run away from truth and do manipulations to cover  up
> foolish thoughts on Vedic history by making a lobby and you are doing such
> acts only, otherwise if you have guts, indulge in open discussions and
> moderate yourself.
>
> Forget all other things, You don't even know how your ancestors got the term
> 'HELLO' from makers of the Vedas and you fools wd tell us vedic etymology,
> none of you have knowledge of munda the dialect spoken in India, neither you
> know if munda was at all spoken in the vedic age but you w'd count Munda
> loan words in Vedas,  this is the kind of  linguistics you have learnt.
>
> When it comes to surface that methdology applied in Munda projects was
> ineffecient, primitive and immature, you should go on to explore the ways to
> improve upon not to hide the holes, dont rant on "Science".
>
> None of you know over the period what changes came into munda but you fools
> wd run to build theories and if we don't listen to you, you wd call yourself
> having scientific blend of mind.
>
> Your discussions exposes all , you all have never read Rigveda's all
> mantras, not even once but by making lobbies think we wd listem to your
> foolish talks..
>
> Who makes lobby. those who are living in fools paradise, what to expect from
> illiterates.
>
> Keep your bad mouth under control !!
>
> Lalit Mishra
>
> ------------------------------
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 10:27 PM IST Bhrihskwobhloukstroy wrote:
>
>>You damned stupid fool little ignorant guy can spend your useless life
>>without knowing anything of Science, but in writing such rubbish are
>>really acting against India's History and the deep Prehistory of Veda.
>>Linguistics can provide precious insights into India's Antiquities,
>>far more ancient than you can think, but evidently you prefer a
>>colonialist approach. Shame on you!
>>
>>2013/10/20, Lalit Mishra <litsol@...>:
>>>
>>> Linguistics is no rocket scince, not more than a lame duck tool in its
>>> curent level, The way you people project the absurd theories like
>>> AIT/AMT/OIT etc, gathers no value among us the young Aryans of India, You
>>> can remain in a small narrow world of your that you make any sense to
>>> us, If
>>> you people have any sense of a language, you could make better structure
>>> of
>>> your illogical language that you call english, and for that also
>>> motivation
>>> and framework you got from Indian Aryans.
>>>
>>> Linguistic can only show that language "A" has shared a few words from
>>> the
>>> other language say "B" and if history is known, it can say something
>>> about
>>> direction the word is moved over the time, beyond this, it knows nothing.
>>>
>>> Sanskrit is only source, only proto europian languages there is no PIE
>>> etc,
>>> dont think that you can befool Indians other than those who are paid in
>>> profession of history and those historians work or opinion, dosnt have
>>> value
>>> in India  as we know that such Indian historians are no better than copy
>>> cat
>>> who speak in his western master's language, worthless guys !!
>>>
>>>
>>> The fun and folly that you people make with respect to making decisions
>>> on
>>> antiquity and origin of Vedic Homeland and that with no knowledge of
>>> Vedas, shows your ingratitude only and with this level of so called
>>> linguistics, there is no absurdity to this scale, Never be in illusion of
>>> that sort.
>>>
>>> First learn some Sanskrit and then develop skills to understand meaning
>>> of
>>> Vedic mantra and get yourself evaluated yourself by Indians and then only
>>> dare talking on Vedas,Same is the languages like munda that you people
>>> neither understand nor speak and still go on to build grammar and then
>>> call
>>> yourself open minded.
>>>
>>> Madness is not openness !!
>>>
>>> Great !!
>>>
>>> Lalit Mishra
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Brian M. Scott <bm.brian@...>
>>> To: Lalit Mishra <cybalist@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2013 3:11 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [tied] RE: Hindu noise-makers, Elst and OIT -- a review
>>>
>>>
>>> At 4:16:51 AM on Sunday, October 20, 2013, Lalit Mishra wrote:> Dear F
>>> Brighenty,Still can’t spell his name, I see.> Austroasiatic etymologies
>>> are
>>> not applicable for MunaMunda. And your assertion is ignorant rubbish.>
>>> language, no use citing Austroasiatic etymology, since,> these two
>>> languages, are in fact, dialects not the> languages and as I revealed
>>> over
>>> here, the methodology> used in the research as well as scope frozen for
>>> the>
>>> research is incorrect for the reason that research has not> taken the
>>> whole
>>> eco-system into account, I w'd say the> methodology used was very
>>> primitive, immature.You’ve ‘revealed’ nothing of the kind: you’ve
>>> merelydemonstrated conclusively that you’re wholly ignorant of
>>> andtherefore
>>> completely unqualified to discuss linguistics.This list has a long
>>> tradition
>>> of being open-minded nearlyto the point of letting its brains fall out,
>>> but
>>> thisnonsense isn’t even borderline, and I’m perfectly willing tostart
>>>  rejecting it.Brian
>>>
>