{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025813692480359147, 'fraction_numerical': 0.019079685746352413, 'mean_word_length': 5.194444444444445, '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}}
1. Matthijs Siegenbeek in Defence of Dutch

Matthijs Siegenbeek (1774-1854) was the fĳirst to hold a chair solely devoted to Dutch. While young at the time of his appointment in 1797, he would soon occupy a central position in many cultural networks of the Netherlands. He authored the fĳirst offfĳicial spelling of Dutch (1804) and was one of the fĳirst historians of Dutch literature. This chapter discusses Siegenbeek’s activities in the fĳield of Dutch studies, particularly his linguistic publications. These are interpreted within the framework of cultural nationalism, and against the background of the formation of the Dutch nation-state. Throughout his career, Siegenbeek was in defence of Dutch, where Dutch should be interpreted as a cultivated, normalised, and uniform variety modelled after the written language of well-known authors, symbolically representing the Dutch nation.