{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017142857142857144, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01, 'mean_word_length': 5.20353982300885, '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}}
Re-constructing semantic maps: the comitative-instrumental area

Abstract Semantic maps are tools which represents cross-linguistic regularities in the mapping of meaning on form. Although they have become increasingly popular in semantic studies since the late 1990s, they have been associated with a number of methodological problems, including the reliance on the preferences and intuitions of the individual researcher. In this paper, we argue for the systematic use of large databases to improve the validity of semantic maps. We do so by presenting a study of instrumental and comitative markers based on a sample of 200 languages, and comparing the results with previous research in this area.