[Michel Danino's recently uploaded paper] Methodological issues in the Indo-European debate

21 views
Skip to first unread message

Megh Kalyanasundaram

unread,
Jul 10, 2019, 12:31:27 PM7/10/19
to भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्
Abstract: The Indo-European debate has been going on for a century and a half. Initially confined to linguistics, race-based anthropology and comparative mythology, it soon extended to archaeology, especially with the discovery of the Harappan civilization, and peripheral disciplines such as agriculture, archaeometallurgy or archaeoastronomy. The latest entrant in the field, archaeogenetics, is currently all but claiming that it has finally laid to rest the whole issue of a hypothetical migration of Indo-Aryan speakers to the Indian subcontinent in the second millennium BCE. This paper questions the finality of this claim by pointing to inherent limitations, methodological issues and occasional biases in current studies as well as in the interpretation of archaeological evidence.


***

5 related papers/articles:



Abstract: William Jones, who was the first to find a link between three ancient languages, namely: Greek, Latin and Sanskrit, has been regarded as the father of linguistics. His placing of Sanskrit at the apex of other languages, at first, received wide support from European scholars, soon after his translations of the Sanskrit texts started appearing in Europe. The term Indo-European will eventually be coined and the initial excitement among the Europeans of having come across the beauty and power of Sanskrit will fade. The sociopolitical events of late nineteenth-century Germany and Austria will result in placing of the Europeans in ascendancy, both ethnically and linguistically. As a consequence, Sanskrit will be demoted from its high position and the place of the ‘Indo’ half of the ‘Indo-European’ name marginalised. These forces have continued to gather momentum with some speed in the recent decades. The prevailing Western view, crystallised by Asko Parpola in a recent book and concerted efforts by specialists in a number of fields, including genetics, to reduce India to a peripheral and minor position form the subject for this discussion.


Abstract: Whether posited as an invasion by or migration of Aryans, these variant forms—of an into-India hypothesis (supposed movement into India around the second millennium BCE)—are underpinned by one constant: the consequence that the earliest forms of Vedic culture and Sanskrit are not indigenous to India. Written in 2017, this paper examines, in three dimensions, whether such a hypothesis, given its startling consequence to Indic history, can remain a preserve of only one domain (linguistics) before demonstrating not only an absence of proof for such a consequence, amongst other related questions, in key Indic texts through a study of the terms ārya and drāviḍa but also specific problematics in the development of this hypothesis in historical linguistics. 

Excerpts from review comments received: 

         Dr. Korada Subrahmanyam: "...both of you contributed a great deal of knowledge to many people, especially from the field of Linguistics, who have been of the view that it is the Western Linguists that deserve the appreciation for analyzing  Language at both micro and macro levels. The books chosen by you and the points you selected to refute - in fact bring out the truth - with regard to Language Science - is commendable.
We require more such Articles simply because we want to kill the inferiority complex of Indians thru the pen and open the treasure trove of knowledge that has been lying unattended for centuries. Hope you guide/encourage others also in this path ."

         Dr. Subhash Kak: "Enjoyed reading your article. Very well argued."





***

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages