German Indology

[Luis Gonzalez-Reimann]

Dear members of the Indology list,

Now that Schlingloff's list has caused somewhat of a stir, I would like to
ask our German (or German speaking) colleagues their opinion concerning the
use of the term Indo-Germanic, as opposed to Indo-European.

I am puzzled by the fact that the English translation of Hermann Kulke's and
Dietmar Rothermund's book on Indian history (A History of India, Routledge,
1995) uses the term Indo-Germanic instead of Indo-European, which is the
usual term in English.  The translation, by the way, was made by Rothermund
(if I am reading the preface correctly).
I would appreciate any comments.

Luis Gonzalez-Reimann
University of California, Berkeley



> From pwyzlic at pwyz.rhein.de 21 1997 Feb +0100 22:20:03
Date: 21 Feb 1997 22:20:03 +0100
Subject: Re: Bhavanakrama of Kamalasila
From: Peter Wyzlic <pwyzlic at pwyz.rhein.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Raynald Prevereau <raynaldp at bbsi.net> writes:

> Is there any other (English or French) translation of the three BK?

You should have a look at Peter Pfandt: Mahayana Texts translated into
Western Languages. [2nd] rev. ed. Koeln 1986, p. 16-17 and
126. Perhaps John Powers' bibliography on Yogacara lists also some
contributions to the Bhavanakrama (I don't have it here at hand).

\bye
-- 
Peter Wyzlic                                          pwyzlic at pwyz.rhein.de