This book represents the culmination of the author's work to date – it incorporates and updates previous articles and adds much new material. This book is not – nor was it ever intended to be – a comparative grammar of either the Indo-European or the Afroasiatic language families. It is, rather, a comparison of Proto-Indo-European with Proto-Afroasiatic. While this is not the first attempt to demonstrate that Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Afroasiatic are genetically related, it is the first to use the radical revision of the Proto-Indo-European consonantal system proposed by Thomas V. Gamkrelidze, Paul J. Hopper, and Vjaceslav V. Ivanov. Moreover, unlike previous endeavors, this is the first to make extensive use of data from the non-Semitic branches of Afroasiatic. The assumptions underlying this investigation of the possibility of the common genetic origin of Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Afroasiatic differ considerably from the assumptions made in other works on "Nostratic"; the methodological approach followed in this monograph has been one of rigorous adherence to the time-honored principles of comparative reconstruction.

The “Nostratic” hypothesis — positing a common linguistic ancestor for a wide range of language families including Indo-European, Uralic, and Afro-Asiatic — has produced one of the most enduring and often intense controversies in linguistics. Overwhelmingly, though, both supporters of the hypothesis and those who reject it have not dealt directly with one another’s arguments. This volume brings together selected representatives of both sides, as well as a number of agnostic historical linguists, with the aim of examining the evidence for this particular hypothesis in the context of distant genetic relationships generally. The volume contains discussion of variants of the Nostratic hypothesis (A. Bomhard; J. Greenberg; A. Manaster-Ramer, K. Baertsch, K. Adams, & P. Michalove), the mathematics of chance in determining the relationships posited for Nostratic (R. Oswalt; D. Ringe), and the evidence from particular branches posited in Nostratic (L. Campbell; C. Hodge; A. Vovin), with responses and additional discussion by E. Hamp, B. Vine, W. Baxter and B. Comrie.

This volume of essays examines the claim that a linguistic macrofamily can be identified which includes not only the Indo-European and Afroasiatic language families but also the Kartvelian, Uralic, Altaic and Dravidian families. The Nostratic case was put by Aharon Dolgopolsky in his The Nostratic Macrofamily and Linguitic Palaeontology, and it is here evaluated critically by linguists specialising in the language families concerned. Contents include: The Nostratic Macrofamily (A. Bomhard); Nostratic Languages: Internal and External Relationship (V. Shevoroshkin); Beyond Nostratic in Time and Space (G. Decsy); Nostratic and Linguistic Palaeontology in Methodological Perspective (L. Campbell); Family Trees and Favourite Daughters (A. McMahon, M. Lohr & R. McMahon); Linguistis Palaeontology: For and Against (I. Hegedus); Afroasiatic and the Nostratic Hypothesis (D. Appleyard); The Dravidian Perspective (K. Zvelebil); Altaic Evidence for Nostratic (A. Vovin); On Semitohamitic Comparison (R. Voight); Toward a Future History of Macrofamily Research (D. Sinor).