SV: Is the Aryan Invasion a Myth?

[Robert J. Zydenbos]

Lars Fosse has already summed up the importance of lingustic evidence
in this matter. It should be clear that when we are dealing with what
is essentially a *linguistic* question, linguistic evidence is far
more relevant than archaeological (or whatever other) evidence ever
can be. It looks unbelievable that there are still people around who
dare question this.

This 'debate' (why do I place quotation marks? because it is too
amateuristic, dirty and vicious to be considered a true debate) has
been on this list before, and we may assume that the same noises
will be made again. What is still lacking, however, is a deconstruction
of why anyone could be fanatically and irrationally interested in
opposing the well-established conclusion that the Indo-Germanic
languages entered the Indian subcontinent from outside. It looks like a
thinly disguised attempt at reviving E. Said's "Orientalism" thesis
(which has already been thoroughly exploded) using quasi-scientific
arguments.

RZ