In this appendix, we attempt to provide a representative, reasonably comprehensive (but by no means exhaustive) listing of the hypotheses of distant genetic relationships which have been proposed. Limitations of space and practical considerations prevent us from evaluating each of these. Obviously these hypotheses are not all of even quality. Some are plausible and deserve further attention; some would find it difficult to escape ridicule, though they might be entertaining. We make no effort to provide extensive references for these various proposals, but do mention some relevant bibliography in some of the cases.

1. Afroasiatic (formerly Hamito–Semitic) (Greenberg 1963)

2. Ainu–Altaic (Patrie 1982)

3. Ainu and Indo–European (Lindquist 1960; Narumi 2000a; Tailleur 1961; see Hamp 1968)

4. Ainu–Austroasiatic (Vovin 1993)

5. Ainu–Gilyak (cf. Naert 1962)

6. Algonkian–Gulf (Haas 1958b, 1960; Gursky 1966–7, 1968)

7. Algonquian–Gulf and Hokan–Subtiaba (Gursky 1965, 1966–7, 1968)

8. Almosan–Keresiouan: Greenberg combined his Keresiouan (composed of Caddoan [including Adai], Iroquoian, Keresan, and Siouan–Yuchi) and Almosan (Sapir's Algonquian–Wakashan, combining Algic and Mosan) (Greenberg 1987:162–4).

9. Altaic (Georg et al. 1999; Grunzel 1895; Menges 1961, 1975; Miller 1987, 1991; Menovshchikov 1968; Poppe 1960, 1965, 1973, 1974, 1975; Ramstedt 1946–7, 1952, 1957; Shherbak 1966, 1986a, 1986b; Starostin 1991b; Starostin et al. 2003; Schott 1853, 1860; see Doerfer 1966, 1968, 1973, 1985, 1988; R'ona–Tas 1974; Ramstedt 1914–15, 1915–16; Starostin 1986; Unger 1990a; cf. Joki 1975, 1976, 1977, 1980)

10. […]