S. S. Misra

"Classical Sanskrit is often called Paninian Sanskrit. Western scholars are of the opinion that this is a continuation of Old Indo-Aryan in the MIA period. This is only partially true."

"Mallory (1997), for example, who is otherwise noteworthy for his thorough and fair approach to all points of view, characterizes S. S. Misra's entire position by a sole tongue-in-cheek comment that he sees fit to extract from Misra's book: "India has not been rejected as a potential homeland of the Indo-Europeans (pace Misra 1992: 41) only because 'it is a nice place to live and people would not move outside it'!" (104). Misra has dedicated a lifetime to writing dozens of specialized books on Indo-European languages, and, while one may not agree with some of his arguments in his book on the Aryan problem (such as the primacy of Sanskrit), his observations regarding the Finno-Ugric loans, at least, do merit a less flippant characterization and a more solid response."

"Satya Swarup Misra (1992) ... argues that many of the linguistic features in the Anatolian documents are much later than Vedic but identical to the forms found in Middle Indo-Aryan.34 These were also noticed by Kenneth Norman (1985, 280).35 Hodge (1981) also draws attention to satta 'seven', which is the Prakrit form of Sanskrit sata, and remarks that the inscriptions show a Prakritic form of Sanskrit a thousand years before such forms are known in India itself on inscriptions. These observations fit comfortably with the proposal that the Near Eastern kings could have left the Indian subcontinent after the early Vedic period, bringing post-Vedic, Indo-Aryan linguistic forms with them. The most drastic corollary of such a claim, as Jacobi noted, would be a major reevaluation of the dating of the Rgveda, which must have considerably predated the appearance of the Near Eastern texts in 1600 B.C.E. if these do, indeed, represent a diachronically later, as opposed to a synchronically contemporaneous, or dialectal, form of Indo-Aryan."