Newsgroups: sci.classics,sci.lang,news.groups
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!usenet.cis.ufl.edu!caen!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!alderson
From: alderson@netcom.com (Richard M. Alderson III)
Subject: Re: Trying to find a place for Sanskrit discussions.
In-Reply-To: vidynath@math.ohio-state.edu's message of 10 Nov 1994 07:27:36 -0500
Message-ID: <aldersonCz2CGn.JD6@netcom.com>
Followup-To: news.groups
Reply-To: alderson@netcom.com
Fcc: /u52/alderson/postings
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <39t3jo$ofo@math.mps.ohio-state.edu>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 1994 17:55:34 GMT
Lines: 43
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.classics:5064 sci.lang:32718 news.groups:122557

In article <39t3jo$ofo@math.mps.ohio-state.edu> vidynath@math.ohio-state.edu
(Vidhyanath Rao) writes:

>I have been trying to get a newsgroup for Sanskrit off the ground.  One
>suggestion that I have received is to try using sci.classics and if/when the
>volume is too large, only then to split off a new group.  How do the regular
>readers of sci.classics feel about this? (I have no idea of how large the
>volume would be. If past experience in soc.culture.indian is any guide, the
>traffic is episodic, but the posts could be long, and on occasion, more than a
>few.)

>I am told that the charter of sci.classics does not completely prohibit
>discussion of Sanskrit and that posts about Sanskrit do appear here once in a
>while. But the FAQ gives no indication of that. I would appreciate any
>clarification.

It is true that the charter of sci.classics does not preclude the discussion of
languages other than Greek and Latin.  This was a point made in the original
discussions to set up the group, and Sanskrit was explicitly mentioned at that
time, along with Hebrew, as potential occupants of the group.

However, I see from your draft (?) charter that you wish to create a subgroup
of sci.lang.  Why have you not posted the RFD to that group?  Why haven't you
begun to use that group for discussions, to see whether such an off-shoot is
necessary?

I would also like to suggest that this be put on hold at least until the
proposal for a new humanities/liberal arts hierarchy is decided, as that may
well affect groups such as sci.classics--which we would have placed in such a
heirarchy when we voted it into existence.

I have cross-posted this followup to sci.lang and news.groups, and directed
followup to news.groups, because I think that this calls for a lot more
discussion than it seems to have been given in the relevant groups.

Please, readers of sci.classics:  Do the same thing with any followup of your
own--cross-post to sci.lang and news.groups, and move the discussion to
news.groups.
-- 
Rich Alderson   You know the sort of thing that you can find in any dictionary
                of a strange language, and which so excites the amateur philo-
                logists, itching to derive one tongue from another that they
                know better: a word that is nearly the same in form and meaning
                as the corresponding word in English, or Latin, or Hebrew, or
                what not.
                                                --J. R. R. Tolkien,
alderson@netcom.com                               _The Notion Club Papers_
