River Sarasvati: Atomic scientists reconfirm location

[Paul Kekai Manansala]

Michael Witzel wrote:
>
> Paul Kekai Manansala:
> > Prehistory is not usually determined by philological study
> >of texts written down thousands of years after the proposed events.
> > Think again: the Rgveda, due to its near-perfect ORAL transmission,

The history of the oral transmission is not known. The oral transmission
that we know now is very good, but it might not have always been that
way.


>
> >Archaeology, anthropology, genetics, etc., are the 'harder' approaches
> >that must be used in analyzing the past.
>
> Ever noticed that archaeologists (Allchin :: Shaffer),
> anthropologists  (do they even know what they *should* do, right now?),
> even geneticists (Cavalli-Sforza :: Vince Sarich, Berkeley)
> INTERPRET their data?  And always differently...
>

The history of linguistics is not very much different. Nor do linguists
today agree with each other, check out Nostratic theory, Proto-World,
EuroAsiatic, etc.


> >Free interpretation of Vedic hymns, dating of language, etc. is very
> >soft, mushy stuff.
>
> Mushy indeed, if one does not pay attention to the differences between
> 'normal', classical Sanskrit and Vedic, to textual/linguistic levels, basic
> rules of comparative linguistics etc.
>
> As for some really mushy stuff, I suggest that readers check out
> P.K.Manansala's Austro-centric  website

For Indic languages:

    http://www.geocities.com/pinatubo.geo/austric.htm

For Sumerian:

    http://www.geocities.com/pinatubo.geo/sumer.htm


And I won't mind discussing the hard evidence behind the theories
either.

Regards,
Paul Kekai Manansala

--
Check out http://AsiaPacificUniverse.com/