{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01809954751131222, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.6752136752136755, '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}}
On comparative concepts and descriptive categories, such as they are

The paper claims that the comparative concepts and descriptive categories of Haspelmath are not, pace Haspelmath, entities of a different type. The point is argued with a study of the properties of the English word such and of its counterparts in Dutch and Odia. The reason for choosing such is that it has proven difficult to categorize. It is argued that it is best treated as a category of its own, which one can call ‘similative’. It is more different from categories in its own language than from categories in other languages, and this similarity is what defines the comparative concept.