[jcranmer]

> I'm no historical linguist, but I'd take this finding with a bunch of grains of salt. Eurasiatic language families that seek to combine, say, Proto-Indo-European [2] and Altaic [3] languages are pretty controversial, and in general this paper reeks a bit of glottochronology [4], which is a pretty controversial topic in historical linguistics itself.

It's worth pointing out that everybody who actually studies the relevant Altaic languages now agrees that the Altaic family doesn't exist, not even in 'micro-Altaic' (just Mongolic/Tunguskic/Turkic languages) form. Basically, the consensus is that the similarity between those three languages arise from deep contact rather than genetic relationships (think what happened to Old English after the Norse and Norman invasions on its way to Middle English).