Such words as those for "hundred", "pig", and "king" have something in common: they represent "cultural vocabulary" as opposed to "basic vocabulary". They are likely to have been acquired along with a novel number system and the domestic pig from Indo-Europeans in the south. Similarly, the Indo-Europeans themselves had acquired such words and cultural items from peoples and cultures to their south or west, including possibly their words for "ox", *gʷou- (compare English cow) and "grain", *bʰars- (compare English barley). In contrast, basic vocabulary – words such as "me", "hand", "water", and "be" – is much less readily borrowed between languages. If Indo-European and Uralic are genetically related, there should be agreements regarding basic vocabulary, with more agreements if they are closely related, fewer if they are less closely related.
sUch WORdS as ThosE fOR "HUNdRed" "pig" and "KIng" Have somEthInG in coMmon tHey rEprEsEnt "cUlTuRaL vocabularY" as OpPOSEd To "baSic VocabulaRy" tHey arE LIkEly To hAvE bEen AcqUirED alonG wiTh a novel nuMber systEm aNd thE DOmestIc piG fROM iNDo-EuropEanS in the sOutH SimIlARLy the indo-euRoPeans tHemselves had aCqUired suCh WorDs aNd cuLturAl iTemS fRoM PeoPles and cuLtures to Their SoUTH oR west includinG possibLy theiR WOrds for "Ox" *gʷou- (ComparE englIsh cOw) anD "grAin" *bʰaRs- (Compare enGlisH barleY) iN contrast basiC vOcaBulArY – WOrdS sUch AS "me" "hAnd" "Water" and "Be" – is much less reADILy BorrOWed bETwEen langUaGes if InDo-eURopean aNd uralIc are genEticALly ReLateD tHerE ShouLD bE agreemENtS ReGardINg Basic vOCabulary with moRe agreEmEnts If they are Closely RelAted feweR if They arE Less clOsely relAted