"dirty" ? Re to J.Silk

[thillaud at unice.fr]

>Perhaps I am not the only one who hopes we -- professional scholars of
>Classical India and Sanskrit -- can honestly discuss such issues as "dirty
>words" without blushing, and without feeling we must resort to private email
>to spare sensibilities?  The recent post by Dominique Thillaud suggested --
>or seemed to suggest -- that a private communication was the way to go.  i
>hope not.  As I think the recent discussions in Ann Arbor at the
>Michigan-Laussane Conference showed with regard to issues of race and skin
>color, such "delicate" issues *can*  -- I would say *must* -- be openly
>discussed without prejudice and without inhibition if we are to understand
>Classical India in its own terms, not in the terms of our own (or own age's)
>inhibitions.
>
>J Silk

        I agree completely but my problem was an other one:
        1) long years ago, Paul Guiraud's student in french linguistic,
I've committed a study on metaphora in the terminology of sexual
intercourse, left unpublished because without valuable results:
establishing the corpus was too hard; but experience shows I had more
answers in privacy ;-)
        2) my asking was funly a revival of this old study, I was not sure
to be strictly in the scope of INDOLOGY.


--------------------------------------------------------------
Dominique Thillaud - Universite de Nice - Sophia Antipolis
email : thillaud at unice.fr