Ugric languages → Hungarian "szem", Mansi сам , Khanty сем ). A peculiar exception is the numeral '3', in which Hungarian ("három") and Mansi (хурэм ) point to an original cluster *rm, whereas the rest of the Uralic family suggests original *lm (Khanty холәм, Finnish "kolme", Estonian "kolm", Inari Sami "kulma", Erzya колмо, etc.) This has frequently been listed as an argument for considering Hungarian more closely related to Mansi than Khanty. The reverse has also been suggested—Hungarian and Mansi retaining the original form of the numeral, whereas Khanty and all the Finno-Permic languages would have innovated /l/ for some reason. Hungarian
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