>>analogy from a form that
> > is not attested, which includes the reconstruction of a
>> grammatical marker
> > not found anywhere in the language!
>
>By excluding
> influence from the augment you are in essence saying that you do not
> believe Latin is an Indo-European language.
You are not seriously suggesting that all Indo-European languages had the
augment!
Perhaps you meant "excluding the possibility that Latin had the augment".
If that's what you mean, I would have to look at the evidence - and the
evidence is that Latin shows no sign of the augment whatsoever. It also is
on other grounds not part of the Sprachbund that does have the augment. If
anything, there are more isoglosses separating Latin from that sprachbund
than anywhere else in the IE spectrum.
I am happy to conclude that Latin did not have the augment.
Peter