{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035003431708991076, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013040494166094716, 'mean_word_length': 4.975409836065574, '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}}
AN AGENDA FOR TEXT SEMANTICS: MEANING AND PARAMETRIC ADJUSTMENT

1.1 Although "semantics" has had a long history, the field remains diffuse and refractory to define, more an agglomeration of problems and proposals than a continuity of specified research methods. No doubt this condition reflects the complex and multifarious nature of "meaning" itself. Human cognition and communication are so omnipresent and adaptive that the possible "meanings of meaning" can seem endlessly diverse. At present, the only thing we seem to "know for certain" about meaning is that the "theories of meaning" propounded thus far are much simpler and tidier than the phenomena involved. At some point, extending and complicating available theories will not be sufficient, and new ones must be developed. 1.2 One way to assess the unity and consistency of semantics would be in terms of major projects. Here are some plausible candidates: 1.2.1 Semantics should explain the nature of "meaning". 1.2.2 Semantics should develop a consensual representation for meanings. 1.2.3 Semantics should relate "meaning" to other human concerns, such äs "language" and "knowledge". 1.2.4 Semantics should inquire how meaning is constituted and used by human beings. 1.2.5 Semantics should inquire how the capacity for being meaningful is acquired and exercised. Ideally, all these projects could be pursued in conjunction. Semanticists would doubtless be gratified to attain an explanation