User talk:Pingalaka

-- mādhavpaṇḍit (talk) 11:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! - Pingalaka (talk) 04:46, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

sa-3
Wow! How did you learn so much Sanskrit? —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 14:00, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Ha! Maybe sa-3 is a bit ambitious, as I'm not sure what qualifies for each level. I took a few years' coursework in college and pursued it on my own afterwards, later self-studying PIE. That being said, I have a lot to learn from your talk page (thanks for the detailed explanations to other users' questions!) - Pingalaka (talk) 04:44, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * (Sorry for the late reply!) Even sa-2 is really impressive, I hope to reach it some day... And no problem! I love editing around here, and seeing Indian-language editors is really great since there are so few (for now). —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 01:48, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, I'm like an ine-pro-0.3, but isn't the Neogrammarian school of thought considered outdated by most PIE linguists nowadays? —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 01:58, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I think it's outdated if one wants to consider sound laws as always exceptionless, but we generally operate under that assumption when doing most reconstructions anyways, right? To be honest, it seems I don't know as much as my Babel boxes suggest, so I'd be interested in any good literature on these topics - Pingalaka (talk) 22:10, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
 * ? Mayrhofer's dictionaries are nice too. And anything by Lubotsky. —Aryaman (मुझसे बात करो) 22:19, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Sulk
@Pingalaka The P.I.E. reconstruction which you presented is excellent. However, the semantics do not tie up; and this is a prime example of a tenuous root assumption (that may very well not exist) being derived from a stock root that declines from the appropriate sense. I respect that you no doubt have considerably deeper experience in presenting roots than I; but after 47 years of interest in the field of etymology one's instincts as to what is acceptable and what is not, have been sharpened. The stringent guidelines that I compiled for myself on one's user page prevent most, if not all, errors from happening. Every wrong or false etymology that I had presented in the past has broken at least one of those rules! Kind regards. Andrew H. Gray 08:30, 25 January 2018 (UTC)Andrew (talk)