Debate on the status of the Uralic theory: critical responses

In the last few years the debate 1 on the validity of the traditional Finno-Ugric (FU) /Uralic (U) theory (a debate never totally subsided) has intensified, due to the publications of many books and articles in Hungary and elsewhere in Europe (including my own publications; see also the recent ‘round-table’ interview, whose moderator is Sturm L. (2009)). These publications, one way or the other, challenge the conventional FU/U model, proposing new models of interpretation. Whatever the rights or wrongs of these new, ‘unconventional’ (or, as some scholars would say, ‘dilettante’) models may be, one aspect of this debate certainly deserves full consideration: the growing awareness that the conventional U paradigm is unsatisfactory and might need revisiting.