became convinced that Na–Dené was more closely related to Sino–Tibetan than to other American families. He suggests that the Sino-Tibetan languages are related to the Na-Dené languages. Geoffrey Caveney (2014) suggests that the Sino-Tibetan and Na-Dene languages are related but his analysis does not support the Sino-Caucasian or Dene-Caucasian hypothesis. In contrast, Laurent Sagart proposes a Sino-Austronesian family with Sino-Tibetan and Austronesian (including Kra–Dai as a subbranch) as primary branches. Stanley Starosta has extended this proposal with a further branch called "Yangzian" joining Hmong–Mien and Austroasiatic. August Conrad proposed the Sino-Tibetan-Indo-European language family. This hypothesis holds that there is a genetic relationship between the Sino-Tibetan language family and the Indo-European language family. The earliest comparative linguistic study of Chinese and Indo-European languages was the 18th century Nordic scholar Olaus Rudbeck. He compared the vocabulary of Gothic and Chinese and guessed that the two may be of the same origin. In the second half of the 19th century, Kong Haogu, Shigude, Ijosser, etc. successively proposed that Chinese and European languages are homologous. Among them, Kong Haogu, through the comparison of Chinese and Indo-European domestic animal vocabulary, first proposed Indo-Chinese language macrofamily (including Chinese, Tibetan, Burmese and Indo-European languages). In the 20th century, R. Shafer put forward the conjecture of the Eurasian super language family and listed hundreds of similar words between Tibeto-Burman and Indo-European languages. From the 1960s, Canadian Sinologist Edwin G. Pulleyblank began to argue for the genetic relationship between Sino-Tibetan and Indo-European languages from historical comparative linguistics, anthropology, archaeology, etc. After the 21st century, Zhou Jixu, etc. Chinese scholars also proposed hundreds of cognates of Sino-Tibetan and Indo-European languages. Notes References Citations Works cited (preprint ) reprinted as General External links James Matisoff, "Tibeto-Burman languages and their subgrouping" Sino-Tibetan Branches Project (STBP) Behind the Sino-Tibetan Database of Lexical Cognates: Introductory remarks Sinotibetan Lexical Homology Database Guillaume Jacques, "The Genetic Position of Chinese" Marc Miyake (2014), "Why Sino-Tibetan reconstruction is not like Indo-European reconstruction (yet)" Andrew Hsiu (2018), "Linking the Sino-Tibetan fallen leaves" Language families Sino-Austronesian languages