{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.044630404463040445, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0048814504881450485, 'mean_word_length': 4.649606299212598, '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}}
What the meaning and goal of Rom 5 , 1-11 ( Rhetorical analysis )

Analysing the first two verses, one can easily individuate the different syntactical and rhetorical substructures. Consequently, the division based on syntactical elements does not correspond absolutely to that based on the rhetorical figures. From the syntactical point of view the concatenation can be outlined as follows: Dikaiwqe ,ntej ou=n evk pivstewj (Participial causative relative clause) Eivrh,nhn e;comen pro.j to.n qeo.n dia. tou/ kurivou h`mw/n vIhsou/ Cristou/ (The main clause enlarged on the modifier of agent) Di v ou/ kai. th.n prosagwgh.n evsch,kamen eivj th.n ca,rin tau,thn (The first adjectival relative clause) evn h|e`sth,kamen (The second adjectival relative clause developing the modifier of the first adjectival relative clause). For the last hemisticho of v. 2 we can offer two solutions which depend on the meaning of the conjunction kai,: Kai. [evn h] kaucw,meqa evp v evlpi,di th/j do,xhj tou/ qeou/ . In this case the clause would develop the modifier of the first adjectival clause and would be on the same syntactical level as evn h|e`sth,kamen. The conjunction is understood in the responsive sense.1 The second solution intends the conjunction kai. as the copulative particle2 introducing a new aspect of the Pauline thought and then the clause would be understood as a main clause. Syntactically, it would be on the same level as: