Linguistics

[Sn. Subrahmanya]

>What kind of rules are you talking about?
>You need to compare words which are known to be cognates from across a
>family and use the principle of contrast and complementation to reconstruct
>the proto-forms.
A rational methodology, requires that there be some kind of verification.
If it's just a leap of faith then it becomes religion, not scientific enquiry.
> From H.M.Nayaks book, I was surprised to learn that a comprehensive
comparision of all major Indian languages has never been done (atleast until
the late 60's).
I will really appreciate it, if you can point me to a study, which compares ALL
major Indian languages - not just 1 or 2 from a presupposed language family.

> Please check out
>a text book on historical linguistics from your library and study
>the method used before you attack the time-tested comparative
>reconstruction.
There are many people who have doubts about comparitive reconstruction.
The problem is not about the contribution of linguistics. The question is
whethar it is dependable enough to base ALL historical reconstruction.

It seems to me, because of the 150year baggage,Indologists seem to be
spinning their wheels in the sand of linguistic evidence without using
inputs from fields like archeology, astronomy and a scientific/mathematical
evaluation of original sources.

Now, I will get off my soapbox :)

S.Subrahmanya
Houston, TX