Why Indus script decipherment-based approaches must be abandoned in Indology

 Trying to read the Indus script as any one language is practically untenable and absurd. This is not only because the average length of the inscriptions is short - 4.6 signs, but also because most of the signs would obviously have been word signs (even though the Indus script was a logo-syllabic script as evidenced by the Dholavira signboard which points to the existence of larger inscriptions perhaps for more specialized use) -the presence of a large number of word signs would have been in large part due to the polyglot nature of the Indus valley - the signs would have had to be read by merchants, traders and artisans speaking different languages from different regions of the civilization - Trying to use prefixes and suffixes to read it as any language is obviously absurd and highly unworkable. I can use this "method" to decipher it as half the languages on the face of the planet earth. Naturally, people trying to decipher it as Sanskrit, Dravidian or any other language for that matter have also been unsuccessful. This approach is not just outdated or obsolete - it is antiquated, prehistoric and antediluvian. The first step must be to jettison it before we can make any meaningful progress in Indology.

Read my two papers on the Indus script and my paper on literacy in Post-Harappan India