{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02262443438914027, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01809954751131222, 'mean_word_length': 5.384615384615385, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Phonological underspecification and speech motor organisation

Over the last few years, much work in phonology has been devoted to exploring the way features are specified for segments; in particular, to what extent feature specification may be underlyingly present and/or acquired by rule or default in the course of a derivation. While a number of proposals have been made attributing various degrees of underspecification to abstract levels of the phonology (Kiparsky 1985; Steriade 1987; Archangeli 1988), it has been generally assumed that where phonetic implementation comes into play, i.e. at the end of the derivation, segments are exhaustively specified.