The 12 th session of the Prof. M. B. Emeneau Centenary International Conference on South Asian Linguistics was dedicated to discussion. The open forum, chaired by Dr. Lingadevaru Halemane , discussed the proceedings of the conference and the future direction of linguistics and language studies.

Speaking on this occasion, Dr. Ramakant Agnihotri summed up the proceedings of the conference stating the general issues discussed in the conference like linguistic description, geography, machine translation, folk-literature, general issues concerning linguistics and problematization of issue of English in India and elsewhere. He emphasized that there was a big question mark on the agenda of linguistics and a sense of great despair that the kind of research going on in the field is not satisfactory. He expressed apprehension that that these studies lacked concern to human predicament and underprivileged of human world. Speaking about the relevance of linguistics and language structure, he observed that it has turned out to be socially insensitive. He stressed on the fact that linguistics is becoming increasingly centre stage with people looking towards it. He said that it was time to conceptualize Probal Dasgupta's "Trans Modern Linguistics" and the answers were to be derived differently in the future.

Prof. Ashok. R. Kelkar , summarizing the conference observed that it was about time that we realized the difference between conference, seminar and symposium. He observed that encyclopedic texts are loosely organized quoting examples from Natyashastra and Ashtadhyayi. He expressed disappointment at the fact that people who are to be linguists are working elsewhere and the field of linguistics is crowded by people who are not supposed to be there. There is a need for hope for the future by which pessimistic tradition might find mitigations. He gives a clarion call for the linguists to "pull down the wall" that they have built around themselves. Quoting W. S. Halden's version of formal linguistics, Prof. Kelkar opined that we should be clear of our methodology and the direction we should pursue in the future.

Prof. Hans Henrich Hock pointed to some studies dealing with historical and comparative issues under research in Indian subcontinent. He observed that contact linguistics is a very important element in Indian linguistics. He stated that instead of just overarching the problems we should focus on regional areas like North-east and in this context it was extremely important to consider primitive language and literary languages. Speaking on minority languages he stressed on the need to preserve the native languages.

Dr. Rajesh Sachdeva , speaking on this occasion observed that there are a lot of codified things coming up in language area and there was room for deliberate human intervention in both major and minor languages. Dr. Sachdeva stated that to plan language was to plan society. Languages are resources whose diversity has to be nurtured by people's participation, he emphasized.

Dr. Rajendra Singh felt that it was important to look at the language resources of grammatical structure. He observed that there was need to rebuild some of the things destroyed and that genuine creativity was most essential. Dr. Rajendra Singh emphasized that there was nothing wrong with the concept of Universal Grammar. Speaking about the South Asian Linguistics, he said, there was a need to build exotic language. Observing that time had come to make sense out of all the languages of our time, he concluded that those who indulge in criticizing Chomsky should discriminately ask themselves why this was the case. Dr. Rajendra Singh believed that this conference strengthened his belief that linguists were not an island; but that everyone concerned were in this together.

Prof. K. V. Subbarao said there was a constant conflict between modernization and existing practices; as well as modern theory and existing Meta-linguistics theory. We should neither be influenced nor ignore the modern theories that are emerging in the field. Prof. K. V. Subbarao stated that while writing grammars for all these languages, one needed to consider recognized complex theories and analyze modern grammars and come up with grammars with elements of both.

Prof. Anoop Mahajan spoke about the trends in syntax by the people who have training in the field. The experts have built comparative syntax and also have given importance to cross-linguistic feature, he opined. He observed that genetic syntax and Chomskian Minimalist theories were the two major trends focusing on architectural issues. Speaking about the possible ways of facing interface issue, he stressed on the need to channelize the resources in our country in the right direction.

Prof. D. P. Pattanayak deliberated that every discipline of study had become inter-disciplinary and this was more so in linguistics. He accentuated the need to maintain the multilingual character of the country rather than enforcing one language upon another. He asserted that developing smaller languages was to develop bigger languages. He illustrated the problem areas like historical studies and Sanskrit. He concluded that English should be a partner of development in India .

Dr. Pabitra Sarkar noticed that there was a divide visible in India between theoretical and applied linguistics. While living in India , he said, it was necessary to emphasize the socio-linguistic issues like language and administration, culture and literature and others have to be taken up. He said that the communication of language and linguistics to the people was also very important. Dr. Sarkar concluded that anyone who wanted to develop linguistics should write in Indian languages.

The chairman of the session, Dr. Lingadevaru Halemane , in his final remarks summed up that the conference had been a platform for deliberations between senior most linguists and has set guidelines for the future of this field of study.