Jingyi Gao presented the theory as an alternative to the commonly accepted Sino-Tibetan language family.

[1][10] Similarly, Karl August Hermann argued that the monosyllabic word structure in Sinitic is not an obstacle to a linguistic relationship.

[11] The earliest known mention of a possible relationship between the Uralic and Sinitic languages was made by Sajnovics in 1770, who raised questions about a possible relation of Chinese and Hungarian, due to apparent lexical similarities.

Karl August Hermann made a comparison of Estonian, Finnish and Chinese, arguing that they were related, although he also included Altaic (which itself is today generally rejected) in the family.

[17][18] Estonian academics and linguists such as Ago Künnap, Jaan Kaplinski, Urmas Sutrop and Märt Läänemets along with a few Chinese professors such as Feng Zheng, Li Baojia and Jiang Jicheng have expressed interest over the theory and calling for more studies on the topic.