etymologies & MJ

[thompson at handel.jlc.net]

Perhaps it would not be inappropriate, to use the double negative so dear
to Gonda, to weave together two distinct, recent threads in this posting.
It would seem to me that the recent spate of word-play on the name and
character of MJ actually confirms my point about etymology and puns.
Apparently the impulse to motivate semantic associations is so strong that
even typically staid Indologists are inclined to participate in non-serious
efforts to do so.

It has always seemed to me to be striking that those most inclined to "bad
puns" [i.e., bad etymologies] have inevitably  been those most preoccupied
with language: i.e., poets, linguists, philologists, et al.

It would seem to me that the pleasure gained from such play by us is very
similar to the satisfaction gained from such play [not necessarily
non-serious] on the part of Vedic poets, YAska, and the grammatical
tradition at large.

The point is this: if we actually understood why we ourselves are inclined
to this sort of thing, we might better understand why Vedic poets,
grammarians, and early philosophers of language were too.

Sincerely,
George Thompson