>my
> irony about the inability of comparative linguists to actually
> explain how a certain reconstruct was pronounced.
This is a necessary part of the game, Eva. When we go beyond attested
evidence to reconstructed forms, we have to guess what might best have
explained them. In some cases this is obvious (eg *r > /r/) but in
others, we have a few problems (eg *h3). PIE is to some extent merely a
symbolic representation of what we find in the existing languages. Its
actual phonetic reality lies slightly beyond proof, and closer to
intelligent guessing.
Peter