http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pehook/bangani.abbi2.html
"What does this all prove7 Zoller's contention is correct. The
language seems to have retained some very archaic structures,
retaining PIE k-, -l~-, g- and -g-. Many. words in Bangani unlike
other IA languages of the region have not witnessed palatalization
defying RUKi Rule. It is difficult to prove at this point whether this
is because of its affiliation to Kenturn language as claimed by
Zoller. However, on the basis of the first-hand data acquired during
these two field trips. it can be said without any prejudices and with
some certainly that some Western Indo-European language (perhaps
Tokharian) of which we have no knowledge so far. either had a
significant role in substratumizing Bangani or, Bangani itself was
genetically related to this unknown Western IE language. There are
many other features in the language such as existence of O as against
a of I.Ir., pre-verbal auxiliaries (without being a V2 language
system), and post auxiliary negatives that may also be seen as
retentions of archaic structure in Bangani of which traces are only in
Indo-European languages (Abbi 1997 forthcoming)."
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~pehook/bangani.hock.html
"A related question is the nature of the western centum influence.
Words like _gOsti_ seem to rule out Greek influence (and thus the
possibility that we are dealing with linguistic echoes of Alexander's
army); _lOktO_ would eliminate Germanic and Celtic; and _kOtrO_ would
eliminate Greek and Latin. That is, no known western centum language
could be the source for all of the relevant words. At the same time,
the fact that *a and *o exhibit the same outcome (O, no doubt via *a,
see below) suggests possible affiliation with the Balto-Slavo-Germanic
group (or possibly with Antalolian?)."