Lexical Matches between Sumerian and Hurro-Urartian: Possible Historical Scenarios - Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative
Sumerian language SE Iraq, 2900 BCE - 1700 BCE, survived as a highbrow and religious language to 100 CE. It and Ancient Egyptian are the two languages with the oldest written records.
The
Hurro-Urartian languages include Hurrian, SE Anatolia / NW Iraq, 2300 - 1000 BCE, and Urartian, E Anatolia, 900 - 585 BCE
Author Alexei Kassian considers two proposals, Igor Diakonoff's Munda (Austroasiatic) hypothesis and John Bengtson's Dene-Caucasian hypothesis. For Sumerian-Munda, the best matches he finds are "fish" - Sum. ku, kua (ku6) ~ Proto-Munda *qa and for "I" - Sum. nge ~ Munda *ing. For Sumerian-DC, the best matches he finds are "I" Sum. nge ~ SC *ngV, "meant" Sum. uzhu ~ Yen. *ise ~ ST *s'a
Out of a 110-word Swadesh-list variant, he found 65 words represented in both Sumerian and Hurrian, because there is too little of Urartian to work with.
He first considers the probability of coincidence, by doing a scramble test. The number of coincidences peaks at 2, and the chance of getting 6 or more coincidences is 2.1%. With 5 or more, it's 6.9%. The difference is whether or not one counts Sumerian sheng ~ Hurrian isena "rain" as a match. But not only consonants but also vowels match in some cases, and AK tried again with more fine-grained consonants. He found 0.36% and 1.6%.
Turning to borrowing,
The general rule says that, among lexical items, cultural vocabulary is always borrowed first, whereas basic vocabulary is generally more resistant to borrowing (Thomason & Kaufman 1988: 74-76; Thomason 2001: 70-71). More precisely, this maxim is complied with in all cases where the sociolinguistic history of relevant peoples and languages is known to us.
The Swadesh list is often considered a sort of core list, though AK concedes doubts about items like "seed" and "person, human being". Yet he considers the Leipzig-Jakarta list to be based on poor statistics.
If a language has foreign items in its Swadesh wordlist, this language is bound to have borrowings from the same source in other parts of basic vocabulary, and especially a great number of loanwords of the same origin in its cultural vocabulary (cf., e.g., modern English lexified by French and Scandinavian, or various Lezgian languages lexified by Azerbaijani). This is not the case of Sumerian–Hurro–Urartian contacts, because there are virtually no candidates for lexical or grammatical borrowings between these languages besides the six (of five) discussed Swadesh words.
Furthermore, the cognates that he identifies are in the more stable part of the Swadesh list.
He rejects common ancestry as involving going back too far in time, about 12,000 BCE. But that's about right for the origin of agriculture in the Middle East and its later spread.
He then settles on partial language shift, Hurrian as sort of half-Sumerian or Sumerian as sort of half-Hurrian, from Sumerians moving into Hurrian territory or Hurrians moving into Sumerian territory.
since Judaism is considered to be matrilineal. 
grooves (perhaps).