Comparative linguistics

[RM.Krishnan]

At 3/16/00 3:45:00 PM, you wrote:
>Am Thu, 16 Mar 2000 schrieb Venkatraman Iyer:
>
>> Contrary views on Linguistics by distinguished Professors.
>>
>> Prof. Gupt earlier:
>> > [...] Aryan construct
>> >served not only the colonial regime, it still serves the current
>> >north-south divide.
>
>Like the contributions of some other list members, this too reveals a
>fundamental misunderstanding. The sentence *should* have read: "[The] Aryan
>construct [may have] served not only the colonial regime [even if we do not
>know how, and linguists are totally unaware of this, but] it still serves
>[i.e., helps] [*to explain*] the current north-south divide [which already
>existed for a very long time prior to the British period]."
>
>Probably Prof. Gupt in Delhi is not a linguist, or if he is, he has not done
>the basics of Dravidian studies (which in itself is no terrible sin, since
>linguistics is a vast field with many specialisations. But for an Indian
>linguist this would be strange). But by reading some old messages to this list
>over the past few years, he and others can learn a little about the
>'Madrasis' -- as everyone roughly south of Bombay is pejoratively called in
>Delhi: and that is a divide that has not been caused by any activities of
>modern linguists.
>
>RZ
>
I just want to add one remark.

In this honoured list itself, with many scholars around, the word 'Indology' is almost always interpreted as
'Sanskritology' i.e. matters relevant to north India.

Where is South India and related matters? Once in a while a few scholars write about Tamil and others are apparently
dismissive about it. In two of my postings, I mentioned that indology does not get benefitted by restricting like this.

Any introspection ?

With regards,
RM.Krishnan