{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0286144578313253, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.990990990990991, '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}}
LIMITS OF FORMALISM IN DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

The present study inquires whether strict formalism, divorced from meaning, is possible in discourse analysis. For this investigation the system expounded in Discourse Analysis Reprints will be used äs the ultimum of formalistic rigor. The "stringency and uniqueness" of Harris' method are conceded by Walter A. Koch, although this admission does not prevent him from proposing a method of his own. Later in the paper other alternative models of analysis than Harris', such äs those of Samuel R. Levin, Koch, and Kenneth L. Pike, will be evaluated, and will justify the detailed discussion of Discourse Analysis Reprints.