{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.033820840950639856, 'fraction_numerical': 0.025594149908592323, 'mean_word_length': 5.479289940828402, '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}}
Transformational grammarians and other paradoxes

This paper argues that morphs can/should be granted node status in tree structures. Most
theories of morphology do not do this. For instance, word-based morphologies (Anderson
1992 and others) see inflectional affixes appearing post-syntactically, producing a specific
word form based on paradigmatic rules. On the other hand, derivational affixes attach prior to
syntax. So-called "bracketing paradoxes" (Williams 1981, Pesetsky 1985, Spencer 1988,
Sproat 1988, Beard 1991, Stump 1991) such as "transformational grammarian" concern
primarily derivational affixes (here: -ian). If a theory can avoid bracketing (or structural)
paradoxes by maintaining an entirely surface-based account, then this theory should be
preferred over competing theories that posit different levels or strata in order to explain the
same phenomenon. This contribution demonstrates that such a surface-based account is
possible if the catena is acknowledged. The catena is a novel unit of syntax and morphosyntax
that exists solely in the vertical dominance dimension.