{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.009162303664921465, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002617801047120419, 'mean_word_length': 5.769911504424779, '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}}
13. LINGUISTIC PRESCRIPTION: FAMILIAR PRACTICES AND NEW PERSPECTIVES

A law student inquires whether a correction of sneaked to snuck suggests misinformation and misguided rigidity. This chapter reports an answer to that question in the context of better information about current legal usage and a perennial tendency to linguistic prescription. It also explores attitudes to current borrowings from English into Japanese and French and distinguishes between language as a vehicle of communication and as a symbol of cultural values. Finally, the chapter indicates the schizophrenic character of linguistic judgments about prescription and description and concludes with a characterization of current guidelines for nonsexist language use as sensible prescription.