{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.039399624765478425, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016885553470919325, 'mean_word_length': 4.804347826086956, '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}}
Missing Noun Phrases and Grammatical Relations in Navajo

I assume, initially at least, that nonovert, or phonologically null, arguments are instances of PRO, an empty NP. The use of PRO in Navajo can be described in part by the Noncoreference Principle formulated by Lasnik (1976:6), according to which "if NPi precedes and commands NP2, and NP2 is not a pronoun (or PRO in the Navajo case), NP1 and NP2 are non-coreferential." This will prevent PRO from being interpreted as coreferential with ashkii 'the boy' in a structure like: