{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03526448362720403, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.068702290076335, '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}}
Reflections on some problematic cases for Sturtevant’s Law

Abstract The present paper focuses on some of the several “exceptions” to Sturtevant’s Law in Hittite (i. e. single and double spelling of stops representing, respectively, inherited voiced/voiced aspirated and voiceless stops), which are presented according to the different solutions proposed from time to time by different scholars. A case in particular will be discussed, i. e. the double spelling of stops near /r/ in words pointing to etymologies containing original voiced (or voiced aspirated) stops, in contrast with the “rule”. These counterexamples are explained according to the hypothesis of a phonemic neutralization in proximity to the voiced phoneme /r/, which also caused a lack of consistency in graphic conventions.