Manual of comparative linguistics. Alexander Akulov

we use to count values of PAI and estimate correlation of PAI values, doesn’t know division by zero so we can ascribe to the PAI of Aleut an obviously absurd value (for instance: 0.000001) in order to show the utmost absurdity of any attempts to represent Ainu and Aleut as languages belonging to the same stock.

      Pic. 5. Diagram representing PAI values of languages that don’t form stocks.

      2.3.4.3. Against term “Paleosiberian”

      The term “Paleosiberian languages” was invented to designate isolated languages of Siberia and Far East; it doesn’t mean a hypothetical stock but it is just a set of genetically unrelated languages assembled by their geographic location. Now it would be better to avoid use of this term as far as it doesn’t help to analyse and discover but just inspires development of megalocomparative obscurantism.

      It would be better to use term “isolated languages and stocks of Siberia and Far East” rather than to explain every time true meaning of term “Paleosiberian” since it looks much alike name of stock, it looks too mystic and/or intriguing for random amaterish people could properly understand its meaning.

      2.3.5. Potential relatives of Ainu seem to be in South

      2.3.5.1. Ainu and Austronesian

      Murayama believed that Ainu could be a distant relative of Austronesian (Murayama 1993).

      Despite naïve lexicostatistic approach the idea potentially can be rather realistic since PAI of Ainu is 0.75 and PAI of Austronesian stock is about 0.6.

      2.3.5.2. Ainu and Mon-Khmer

      Vovin tried to show that Ainu was a distant relative of Austroasiatic (Vovin 1993). As well as in the case of Murayama the idea isn’t completely off base since PAI of Khmer is 0.66 that correlates well with that of Ainu. However, I am to note that such researches in the field of linguistics should be correlated with data of other sciences.

      Any hypothesis about relationship of certain languages should be correlated with correspondent contexts and with data of other related sciences: physical anthropology, population genetics, cultural anthropology and archaeology: if a certain date has been set as an approximate time of existence of a Proto-Ainu then how words of contemporary Ainu can be found in preceding epochs? Also if certain ethnic group is thought to have influenced Ainu language then this group hardly could influence rice cultivating terminology (Nonno 2015: 44).

      2.3.6. Particular conclusion about PAI method

      1. PAI is something alike safety valve of comparative linguistics: if its values don’t differ more than fourfold then there is absolutely no obstacles for further research about genetic relationship; if values differ fourfold and more then should be found absolutely ferroconcrete proves of genetic relationship; if values differ sevenfold – tenfold or even more then those languages belong to different stocks.

      It is possible to say that PAI shows direction in which looking for potential relatives of certain language can be perspectives.

      2. PAI can be helpful method in those areas where are many isolated languages/stocks: in North America, in Papua and in Africa.