Uralic languages hypothesis has, however, been rejected by some specialists in Uralic languages, and has in recent times also been criticised by other Dravidian linguists, such as Bhadriraju Krishnamurti. In her book, "The Uralic language family: facts, myths, and statistics", linguist Angela Marcantonio argues against the existence of the Uralic family, claiming that the languages are no more closely related to each other than they are to various other Eurasian languages. All of these hypotheses are minority views at the present time in Uralic studies. Various unorthodox comparisons have been advanced such as Finno-Basque, Hungarian-Etruscan, and Cal-Ugrian. These are considered at best
Indo-Uralic languages borrowed between them, most often from Indo-European languages into Uralic ones. An example of a Uralic word that cannot be original is Finno-Ugric *"śata" "hundred". The Proto-Indo-European form of this word was *"ḱm̥tóm" (compare Latin "centum"), which became *"ćatám" in early Indo-Iranian (reanalyzed as the neuter nominative–accusative singular of an "a" stem > Sanskrit "śatá-", Avestan "sata-"). This is evidence that the word was borrowed into Finno-Ugric from Indo-Iranian or Indo-Aryan. This borrowing may have occurred in the region north of the Pontic-Caspian steppes around 2100–1800 BC, the approximate floruit of Indo-Iranian (Anthony 2007:371–411). It provides linguistic evidence for the