{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.052556818181818184, 'fraction_numerical': 0.04261363636363636, 'mean_word_length': 4.7317073170731705, '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}}
Inclusive and Exclusive Pronouns in English

In this paper we will argue that the inclusive and exclusive personal pronouns of English are not to be described in terms of feature specifications as claimed by Postal (1966), Jacobs and Rosenbaum (1967), and Ingram (1971). Instead we propose that such forms are the result of the processes of sentential or phrasal conjunction (Koutsoudas, 1971) and lexical incorporation (Gruber, 1965; McCawley, 1970). Hence the derivation of the pronoun we in (3c), e.g., is related to the pronouns in (3a) by means of two rules. The first conjoins the sentences of (3a) into (3b), and the second replaces the conjoined elements of (3b) with the lexical form we in (3c).