{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032724984266834484, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.489795918367347, '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}}
Note on Orthography

With a few exceptions that should be obvious to the specialist, historically Islamic place names, titles, festivals, objects, and religious actions have been transliterated according to the Urdu-to-English system employed by John Platts in his A Dictionary of Urdū, Classical Hindī, and English. Historically non-Muslim place names, titles, festivals, objects, and religious actions have been transliterated according to the Hindi-to-English system employed by R. S. McGregor in his e Oxford Hindi-English Dictionary. While many of these terms have origins in Arabic, Persian, and/or Sanskrit, in order to remain true to the sociolinguistic context under discussion, my transliterations reflect the vernacular rather than etymological origins. For the purposes of readability, I have not employed diacritics for people’s names or for words from Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit and Arabic that have come into English. While Hindi and Urdu share a grammar and a basic vocabulary, they are written in different scripts and have, respectively, Sanskritand Arabicinfluenced literary and formal vocabularies. In the context of everyday speech, however, distinguishing between Hindi and Urdu is a relative and highly politicized process, making transliteration of terms from oral sources challenging. In general, I have categorized spoken language as “Hindi” or “Urdu” based upon context, individuals’ pronunciation, and the extent to which the speaker’s language reflected Arabic or Sanskrit influence. Written sources have been transliterated in accordance with the script employed.