{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.06810035842293907, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0064516129032258064, 'mean_word_length': 5.149779735682819, '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}}
Places of Elision

Die abgewrackten Tabus, und die Grenzgängerei zwischen ihnen, weltennaß, auf Bedeutungsjagd, auf Bedeutungsflucht. There: Where? “There” cannot be pointed out, nor can it be predicated upon. It is not a place, nor is it an “it.” One cannot arrive “there,” because one is already “there,” just as every word that is spoken or written, including these here, is there. And yet, what is “there” is always elsewhere... an alibi. “There” (Da) is cast, precisely, as “Entfernung”—where distance (Ferne) and distance from distance (Ent-) hang together in a dynamic suspension—towards the beginning of Martin Heidegger’s analysis of the “Da” in Sein und Zeit (1927), between the paragraphs addressing the directions (Verweisungen) that constitute worldliness and the tuning (Stimmung) in which one is ever finding oneself.1 This suspension is not, therefore, indifferent, but emerges with the structure of pragmatic directions from which spatiality is first to be understood. Because the “there” is, first of all, the “Verweisungszusammenhang” (87) of the world in which understanding, meaningfulness, and possibility are co-founded and lived out, all that there is cannot but be oriented. Being-there is, in this context, being-towards; topology, teleology; every “Da” and “Wo,” a “Dazu” and “Wozu” (78): “Der Platz und die Platzmannigfaltigkeit dürfen nicht als das Wo eines beliebi-