{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0456140350877193, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0008771929824561404, 'mean_word_length': 4.774683544303797, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 4, '<?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}}
Determinacy Analysis and Orthographic Knowledge

In this paper the theory and method of determinacy analysis (DA) are outlined and used to describe and explain the relationship between German /s/ and (s, ss, ß) in particular, and sound and print in general. According to the best spelling-error analysis available, /s/ is the most difficult German sound to spell. We review the facts and their recent analyses, dilating on rule ordering, the elsewhere condition, morphology in orthography, rule of grammar, simplicity, and regularity. Neither generative nor binding analyses are able to handle the constraints involved, suggesting the possible adequacy of the DA instead. The spelling of German /s/ as (s), (ss), or (β) is complex, because it requires knowing a transderivational constraint: if /s/ is stem-final and paradigmatically invariant, it is spelled (β), whereas if/s/ is stem-final and paradigmatically variant, it is spelled (s). Paradigmatic variance and invariance find natural expression within the DA, the former being a determinacy with a completeness of <1, the latter a determinacy with a completenesses of 1. We propose that German /s/ be spelled stadially, rather than directly as (ss; or <β), first as (s), then as either (ss) or <sz) (= <ß». The DA thus provides an analysis of the spelling of German /s/ which is simple, internally motivated and adequate. The classical generative and binding analyses are seen to fail, because both are in principle unable to express transderivational constraints in a non-arbitrary way. The classical generative account introduces an ad hoc, multiply ambiguous, quasi-contextual element, while in the binding analysis /s/ would have to bind the variable L(etter) to (ß) in the governing category of the paradigm of the stem containing /s/, providing /s/ is bound by stem-final position. It is concluded that neither the generative nor the binding approaches to grammar can meet the needs of natural language description and explanation in a principled manner. A more promising approach is DA-a framework based on the frequencies (accuracies and completenesses) of linguistic signs and the quantified use of precisors for the purpose of ambiguity resolution. We urge the adoption and use of DA in future linguistic inquiry.