{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021052631578947368, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.206521739130435, '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}}
Evaluation in OT

The Occam's Razor evaluation metric of generative phonology drove analyses to their most general statement possible, and had far-reaching effects on representations as well as on rules. With the advent of Optimality Theory, which has no comparable evaluation metric, the question arises of whether generality is still prized in formal accounts of language. In this short work, I explore this question, coming to the conclusion that generality is still necessary for empirical reasons, regardless of its non-role in the evaluation of competing grammars.