The issue here is NOT about "correct English". It is about the attitude of
the 'expart' in challenging the write-up of the report.

Whoever wrote it may or may not have been CORRECT or ACCURATE about whether
Xatriya naas was the same thing as Ojapaali. If the writer was not correct
the expert could have corrected it, by EXPLAINING HOW it was not accurate.
Instead the expert decided to mock the writer by IMPLYING that it was NOT
correct, while not telling why it was not correct.

Recently the 'expert' rendered a verdict that Vaishnav scriptures does not
approve of homosexuality and that Vaishnav "ethics" approves of outing
homosexuals. When I asked where in the Vaishnav scriptures such a dogma was
laid down, the answer we got was something only a moron would come up with.

It is the prerogative of the expert not to answer. We cannot send him to
Siberia for not answering. But one might expect that an expert in Vaishnav
ethics would act how Xonkordev  might have  might have acted under the
coircumstrances--by explaining it to the uninformed. Being able to recite
the scriptures from memory while being clueless to is meaning is what the
problem is here. One might also expect that an expert in Vaishnav ethics
would know that one should do unto others how they expect others to treat
him. Obviously these are much too complex concepts for the kind of expert
we are dealing with here.

>the news item equates Ojhaapaali to Satriya. as one of the eminent
>scholars >from St. Louis, say St. Louis expert, edited the news item. was
>it a typo?


We have no 'eminent scholar' in St. Louis. Not in Vaishnavism, not in
Kamrupi ethics, not in 'cognition phenomena'. Chandan Mahanta also doesn't
know WHO wrote the report. Does Brain Deka know that it was written by
someone from St. Louis? If he does why doesn't he ask the writer, instead
of insinuating that Chandan Mahanta wrote it?

A 'typo' is a typographical error and is very different from ignorance,
even though showing off our expertise in the English language is NOT one of
our aims in Assam Net. The issue has been made only to illustrate the
conflict implicit in someone attempting to establish oneself as a linguist
while ignorant about the fundamentals of the structures of that language.


>would appreciate answers without pussy-foot around and dram beating, ... :)


*** The term 'pussy-footing around' is not used to mean evading and what in
the heck is 'dram beating' ? Are you attempting show off your Englidsh
language skills like your 'Kamriupi ethics' expertise again?








At 5:21 PM -0800 11/13/03, Rabin Deka wrote:
>
>
>chan mahanta wrote, "One thing that got me all discombobulated however is
>this thing about 'St. Louis EXPART' ( I wished someone would teach the
>eminent linguist some basic English grammar and spelling. Some Assamese
>won't hurt either) ?"
><http://groups.yahoo.com/group/alnane/message/2560#tilok1>http://groups.yahoo.co
>m/group/alnane/message/2560#tilok1 
>
>i try to again to put forward my inquiry in correct English, ...:)!
>
>refer to ASA Newsletter Volume 31, Issue No 1, news item with heading
>�Assam 2003 in St.Louis�.
>
>the news item equates Ojhaapaali to Satriya. as one of the eminent
>scholars from St. Louis, say St. Louis expert, edited the news item. was
>it a typo?
>
>also may i ask the St. Louis expert what is Ojhaapaali?
>and what is Satriya dance?
>
>would appreciate answers without pussy-foot around and dram beating, ... :)!
>
>
> Do you Yahoo!?
> <http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree>Protect your identity with Yahoo!
>Mail AddressGuard _______________________________________________
>Assam mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
>
>To unsubscribe or change options:
>http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam




_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam

To unsubscribe or change options:
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/options/assam

Reply via email to