{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02416918429003021, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.972972972972973, '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}}
Agglutination, Suffixation or Adaptation? For the History of Indoeuropean Nominal Inflexion

The subject of Indoeuropean nominal inflexion has always been of interest to scholars of I.E., this interest albeit being renewed as from Specht's book. I believe that two important factors contributed to this. First, the theory launched by Vaillant and others following Uhlenbeck, according to which the Indoeuropean Nominative with -s derives from an older ergative. The second factor is the study of the Anatolian data, which allow one to observe a flexional stage of IE. that is older than that known hitherto: its archaisms cannot but be crucial to reconstruction.