Dear Colleagues,

There has been some interesting discussion on what should be regarded as plagiarism and what should not come into the category. Will colleagues enlighten if there is any trace of taking something from someone without acknowledgement in the following citations.  

“Die Sonne war doch allzusehr eine Potenz für sich, als dass die Auffassung von ihr als Feuer erheblichere Bedeutung hätte haben können ” H.Oldenberg Die religion des Veda 1894;1917:109

“The solar aspect of Agni’s nature is not often mentioned, the sun being too individual a phenomenon to be generally conceived as a form of fire”. A.A. Macdonell  Vedic Mythology1897:93 (1963repr.Varanasi)

“But this side (i.e. the solar side DB)” of the nature of Agni is little referred to; the sun was too great and prominent a deity to be treated merely as a form of Agni” A.B.Keith RPVU HOS 31,32; 1925: 156.

As far as I know till now nobody drew attention to the remarkable similarity in language and idea

Best

DB

On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Ashok Aklujkar <ashok.aklujkar@gmail.com> wrote:

Colleagues,

I admire Dominik for his immediate public correction of an earlier remark of his. However, if I had known that he was going to forward my communication to the List, I would have made its wording a little bit more grammatical and not allowed it to retain its ‘note-to-a-friend’ form. Please delete “about” from “not about a marker” and change “his sentence” to “his/her sentence”. It would also have been better if I had alerted Dominik with some such heading as “Not for forwarding to the List, at least not yet.”. Sorry for the extra reading you all had to do.

a.a.

_______________________________________________
INDOLOGY mailing list
INDOLOGY@list.indology.info
indology-owner@list.indology.info (messages to the list's managing committee)
http://listinfo.indology.info (where you can change your list options or unsubscribe)