--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
wrote:

> Ah. It's a reinterpretation of the entire corpus according to a new
> theory that's at odds with everything else known about Indian

epigraphy!

> We could see what Richard Salomon says about TB

TB ?????

in *Indian Epigraphy*

> (Oxford, 1997), and we can wait for reviews of this book.

Mahadevan has stayed on the safe side concerning the Indus Valley
script, saying that he has not made any progress there. I assume that
much of what is said in this article, (see link) is established - the
absence of the pulli, then pulli used as vowel lengthener, only 8
vowels instead of 12, etc, However, the lack of inherent short medial
vowel is new, is that correct?

Suzanne