{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02830188679245283, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006289308176100629, 'mean_word_length': 5.009433962264151, '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}}
Words and feet

This article challenges the commonly-held assumption that words, feet and syllables fit into a single phonological hierarchy, and in particular that feet are always sub-units of words. A number of facts of English rhythm are cited which cannot be accounted for unless words and feet are taken to be units of different hierarchies: many of the differences of rhythm between phrases of otherwise similar phonological structure which are noted by Abercrombie (1964) are accounted for most naturally by differences in placement between, on the one hand, word- and stress-group-boundaries, and, on the other, foot-boundaries.