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
Uralic languages languages are due to ancient contacts. Regardless, the hypothesis is accepted by a few linguists and viewed as attractive by a somewhat larger number. The Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis associates Uralic with the Eskimo–Aleut languages. This is an old thesis whose antecedents go back to the 18th century. An important restatement of it is Bergsland 1959. Uralo-Siberian is an expanded form of the Eskimo–Uralic hypothesis. It associates Uralic with Yukaghir, Chukotko-Kamchatkan, and Eskimo–Aleut. It was propounded by Michael Fortescue in 1998. Theories proposing a close relationship with the Altaic languages were formerly popular, based on similarities in vocabulary as well as in