At 6:37:53 AM on Tuesday, August 14, 2012, Tavi wrote:
> All things being equal, the "laryngeal" hypothesis is also
> what you call an "ad-hoc assumption".
It's a reasoned inference from the data, and about as well
supported as inferences in historical sciences can get. I
realize that you don't know much about IE linguistics and
haven't a clue about supporting claims with careful
argumentation, but this is ridiculous even for you.