{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012084592145015106, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.254716981132075, '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}}
A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks

I present arguments in favor of the Uniformity Hypothesis: the hypothesis that discourse can extend syntax dependencies without conflicting with them. I consider arguments that Uniformity is violated in certain cases involving quotation, and I argue that the cases 
presented in the literature are in fact completely consistent with Uniformity. I report on an analysis of all examples in the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks involving violations of Uniformity. I argue that 
they are in fact all consistent with Uniformity, and conclude that the CDT should be revised to reflect this.