[INDOLOGY] Another round in the California textbook story

[Audrey Truschke]

Perhaps the controversy was over the word "untouchable" rather than
"Dalit"? There are some rather eye-popping suggested emendations
surrounding "untouchable" in the report.

Audrey Truschke
Assistant Professor
Department of History
Rutgers University-Newark

Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow
Department of Religious Studies
Stanford University
e- <audrey.truschke at gmail.com>mail <audrey.truschke at gmail.com> | website
<http://www.stanford.edu/~truschke/>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Nityanand Misra <nmisra at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 15 April 2016 at 23:34, Nityanand Misra <nmisra at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Are the author and the the report reliable? I searched the 477-page
>> summary table report document of suggested revisions to Draft
>> History-Social Science Framework (available from
>> http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/cc/cd/documents/hsssummarypubcomments.doc). The
>> word does not occur *even once *in the document. Then from where did the
>> author pull this statement (italics mine):
>>
>>
> I meant to say The word "Dalit" does not occur even once in the summary
> table report.
>
>
> --
> Nityānanda Miśra
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> INDOLOGY mailing list
> INDOLOGY at list.indology.info
> indology-owner at list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing
> committee)
> http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or
> unsubscribe)
>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://list.indology.info/pipermail/indology/attachments/20160415/96837f51/attachment.htm>