INDOLOGY (Was: Etymon: paTTaN); Witzel, Krishnamurti; Tokunaga

[Sara McClintock]

In a message lamenting the state of the Indology list, Robert Zydenbos wrote:

>, I now immediately delete everything of which the subject line
>does not immediately tremendously fascinate me, unless the name of
>the poster guarantees a level of seriousness. In other words, I
>delete almost everything without reading it.

It strikes me that there is a good chance that this remark has not been
read by most members of the list by virtue of the fact that they have
deleted your message, being uninterested in the subject line.

He continues:

>I am aware that this
>is contrary to the aims of the list; and I am completely in
>sympathy with Prof. Aklujkar's thoughts; on the other hand, Prof.
>Witzel's remark:
>
>>  No one wants to waste time in re-inventing the wheel or
>> engage in
>>  inane debates (Holi,India & Greeks, German Indology, Kratylos type
>>  etymologies, IE & semitic roots,  potters & stupas, etc. etc.)
>
>is perfectly true . . .

The problem, of course, is that even "serious" scholars do not always agree
on which debates are inane.

Since Aklujkar has already spoken so eloquently about the merits of the
present list policies, I will here only quote Dominik Wujastyk's remarks on
new list options. On Sept. 15, he said, "A particularly subversive new
feature (could be very tempting sometimes) is that you can instruct
listserv not to send you messages with a particular subject line.  In
effect, you can censor your own subscription!"

I can well imagine that many members must have already sent listserv
instructions not to send messages with the subject line "INDOLOGY." 




____________________

Sara McClintock
Section de langues et civilisations orientales
Université de Lausanne