These are the main positions in this discussion:
(1) Omotic is a direct descendant of Proto-Afroasiatic and a co-ordinate member with Chadic, Berber, Egyptian, Semitic, and Cushitic (Fleming 1969; Bender 1971; Diakonoff 1988).
(2) Omotic represents one branch of the Cushitic family (Greenberg 1963, 1966; Lamberti 1991, 1993a; and Zaborski 1986a, 1989).
(3) Cushitic and Omotic are co-ordinate members of an older Cushitic-Omotic branch (Bender 1986).
(4) Afroasiatic branches into two: one branch is represented by Omotic alone and the second branch contains the other five sub-families (Ehret 1979; Fleming 1984).
(5) Bender (1997) proposed what he labelled ‘upside-down Afroasiatic’ classification, which emphasizes that Omotic and Chadic represent two of the earliest major splits of Afroasiatic, whereas Berber, Semitic, and Cushitic are sub-families of the third, ‘youngest and most innovative branch of Afrasian’, which he labelled as ‘Central’ (Bender 1997: 28). With regard to the position of Omotic, this classification is similar to that stated under (d).
(6) All of North Omotic (i.e. Gonga languages, the Ometo cluster, Bench, Yem, and Dizoid/Maji languages) forms a sub-branch of Cushitic. South Omotic (i.e. Aari, Banna, Hamar, Dime, and Karo) and Mao should be re-classified as part of Nilo-Saharan (Zaborski 2004).