progress

[Esa Itkonen]

Just two simple comments on the very complicated issues that are involved:
1) I have always emphasized that on most areas of linguistics Panini has
nothing, or very little, to say (i.e. areas like psycholinguistics,
sociolinguistics, diachronic linguistics, linguistic typology). Where he
does excel, is the formal description of a SINGLE language (in his case,
Sanskrit). But in this area, I would like to meet the man or woman who,
knowing Panini's achievement, would dare to claim to have surpassed him.
2) I do NOT accept, on the whole, Kuhn'n 'non-cumulative' view of change in
natural science. But my point is that, in the field of study exemplified by
Panini (but also Sibawaihi, Apollonius, and others), the history is so
'short' that the question whether the Kuhnian scenario applies or not, does
not even arise.
3) Thanks to Tom Givon for creating discussion, once again.
Esa