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 central contention, agreeing with Rédei's views, is that all of the lexical items claimed to be Indo-Uralic can be explained as loans from Indo-European into Uralic (see below for examples). The most common arguments in favour of a relationship between Indo-European and Uralic are based on seemingly common elements of morphology, such as the pronominal roots ("*m-" for first person; "*t-" for second person; "*i-" for third person), case markings (accusative "*-m"; ablative/partitive "*-ta"), interrogative/relative pronouns ("*kʷ-" "who?, which?"; "*y-" "who, which" to signal relative clauses) and a common SOV word order. Other, less obvious correspondences are suggested, such as