G. Subramaniam, Ramana,
Please see this comprehensive article by Dr. D. Priyadarshi:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/44092576/Origi...inguistics
http://t.co/C1L3SUT
The author also presents new evidence for indian J being much older than that of ME-- this possibility was mentioned here in passing before since Oppenheimer considered it likely but confined it only to footnote.
What is clear is that the most recent Indian expansion had components of both postglacial and Neolithic and was overwhelming. It is only European biblical prejudice which gives precedence to the ME in Neolithic. The rubric, of course, is to posit a value neutral ME as the progenitor rather than entertain the possibility of an overarching and generative dynamic emanating out of the subcontinent, ie an advance to the rear strategy.
'Breaking India' also consolidates much of this evidence and Rajiv Malhotra has forsaken his earlier stance that Indians are obsessed with opposing the AIT.
Please see this comprehensive article by Dr. D. Priyadarshi:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/44092576/Origi...inguistics
http://t.co/C1L3SUT
The author also presents new evidence for indian J being much older than that of ME-- this possibility was mentioned here in passing before since Oppenheimer considered it likely but confined it only to footnote.
What is clear is that the most recent Indian expansion had components of both postglacial and Neolithic and was overwhelming. It is only European biblical prejudice which gives precedence to the ME in Neolithic. The rubric, of course, is to posit a value neutral ME as the progenitor rather than entertain the possibility of an overarching and generative dynamic emanating out of the subcontinent, ie an advance to the rear strategy.
'Breaking India' also consolidates much of this evidence and Rajiv Malhotra has forsaken his earlier stance that Indians are obsessed with opposing the AIT.