SV: method of dating RV, III

Tue Nov 3 14:59:29 UTC 1998

At 07:03 AM 11/3/98 GMT, Miguel Carrasquer Vidal wrote:
>Ah yes, I had completly forgotten about (Pre-)Bangani.  That might
>indicate IE speakers at an even earlier date (Tocharians preceded
>Indo-Iranians into Central Asia).  Has anybody ever tried to read the
>IVC script as Tocharian :-) ?
Lookup at
For Dr. Agha Hassan Danis comments

SIVC An Agglutinative Language ?

 On the other hand, I have been talking to Prof. Parpola that certainly
this is
 an agglutinative language, there is no doubt. That has been accepted by
all of
 us. Dravidian is an agglutinative language. But at the same time Altaic is an
 agglutinative language, and certainly we know that there was a connection
 beween Turkmenistan [in Central Asia] and this region. Turkmenistan is a
 region where Altaic languages are spoken. Even in the pre-Indus period we
 have a connection. In what we call the Kot Diji period, we have a connection
 between Indus Civilization and excavations in Turkmenistan. So if we insist
 on an agglutinative language being used inthe Indus period, why not connect
 it with Altaic, rather than just with Dravidian? Why not connect it with
 Sumerian, which is also an agglutinative language? In fact, when I was in
 Korea, I found that their language is agglutinative, which I did not know
 before. Just because of agglutinative language, it is not necessary that
it is
 connected with Dravidian. But unfortunately, our history has been so written
 in the time of the British that earlier we tried to trace out history from
 Aryans, and we thought that before the Aryans were Dravidians, that was the
 idea. So when the Indus Civilization was discovered, it was thought if it
is not
 Aryan, it must be Dravidian, that was the general assumption. But it is not

*                               ?                                       *
*                                                                       *

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list