In a comprehensive rebuttal to Bryan Levman's theory, Stefan Karpik rejects the proposition of an early "pre-Pali" *lingua franca* that evolved into a later, mutually unintelligible Pali. Karpik argues that Levman's reconstructions are undateable, do not prove a *lingua franca* over other possibilities like bilingualism, and fail to explain why an original transmission would be discarded. The core of Karpik's critique focuses on Levman's flawed linguistic methodology, particularly the incorrect assumption of directionality in sound changes, which leads to proposing numerous implausible and unattested "fortitions" (sound strengthening) where lenition, orthographic errors, or dialectical variations are more likely explanations. Karpik further dismisses the claim of rapid linguistic change and mutual unintelligibility due to a lack of syntactical evidence, accusing Levman of circular reasoning and misrepresenting other scholars, ultimately advocating for a simpler model of steady linguistic development where Pali itself is the pre-Aśokan language of the Buddha.
