{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04740406320541761, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03747178329571106, 'mean_word_length': 5.071232876712329, '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}}
Applied Forum: The debate over Yolngu clans

By the early 1980s, something of a consensus had emerged among scholars most recently engaged in research in northeast Arnhem Land. According to this consensus, Yolngu clans (or sibs) are named, exogamous, patrilineal descent groups, divided between two patri-moieties (Dhuwa and Yirritja). Each clan owns a number of usually non-contiguous `estates’ in land and waters; and sites on each estate have associations with a variety of ancestral and other beings. Stories, songs and rituals recount and re-enact ancestral events, represented in the form of painted and sculpted designs and sacred objects. Each clan owns its body of sacra as well as land and waters as its property, and is a corporate group. Warner (1937) arranged these groups and categories into a taxonomic hierarchy of tribe, phratry, and clan. Later schemes did away with the tribe level, but retained the idea of clans as structurally equivalent segments of Yolngu society, some divided into sub-groups. The phratry level became a structure of cross-cutting sets or aggregates linking each clan to many others through its membership of a number of such sets on a number of bases: shared language, shared wangarr ancestors and related ceremonies, shared public songs, and so on. The clan model seems convincing for many purposes, yet it generates anomalies. Warner’s more elaborate taxonomy gave rise to all sorts of inconsistencies (Keen 1995:507 ), but the simpler schemes are not immune. In several cases, anthropologists have differed about the application of the terms `clan’ or s̀ib’. Shapiro (1981:121± 122), for example, counts Dultji-Warramiri and Mirtamirta Warramiri as separate s̀ibs’, while Warner (1937:39 ), Keen (1978:25), Morphy (1984:6) and Williams (1986:64) list Warramiri as a distinct clan or matha. Warner (1937:43± 46) classi® es the name Djambarrpuyngu as a language shared by several groups, Keen (1978:23) takes Djambarrpuyngu as the name both of a `clan-aggregate’ and a clan, Morphy (1984:6, 1991:48 ) counts Djambarrpuyngu as a clan, while Rudder (1997) describes Djambarrpuyngu as a cluster of patri® lial groups. For Warner (1937:43), the name Djapu denotes the language