River Sarasvati: Atomic scientists reconfirm location

Paul Kekai Manansala kekai at JPS.NET
Fri Mar 10 17:00:07 UTC 2000

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

> >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:


For Sumerian:


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

Paul Kekai Manansala

Check out http://AsiaPacificUniverse.com/

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list