{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021545667447306793, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001873536299765808, 'mean_word_length': 5.033898305084746, '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}}
Book review: Villy Tsakona and Diana Elena Popa (eds), Studies in Political Humor: In Between Political Critique and Public Entertainment

above, all of them with a degree of formality that marks them as different from the previous section. In addition, each chapter contains at the end an ‘Inclusive Approaches to Communication’ mini-section, which expands on the implications of practice of the example discussed, and zeroes in on issues that have more to do with making the transition between levels of formality, as well as making the personal political. The jewel of this section would possibly be Chapter 12, ‘Behind the Scenes in Inclusive Research’, which is not only well grounded in the pertinent theory and legislation, making it eminently practical, but also, crucially, has Williams put, so to speak, her money where her mouth is. That is, inclusion is not only a lofty goal touted by the project, but it is something that is done, an action to be performed, a goal to be achieved in very tangible ways, all through research that consciously and clearly distances itself from tokenism. In particular, the description of the processes of joint analysis and reflection on research highlight not only the absolute need for such approaches, but also the clear possibility of executing these steps impeccably. The final chapter, Chapter 15, is the chapter where theory is actually unpacked, in the tradition of conversation analysis that uncoils the ropes of theory always at the end to preserve the integrity of the analysis itself. It provides a good amount of food for thought, particularly for conversation analysts and critical discourse analysts interested in doing further research in this area, or in replicating the experience for practical purposes in their communities of practice. Overall, this is a remarkable book, both in terms of its level of scholarship and usability, but also in terms of its ability to make conversation analysis accessible to researchers and practitioners from other fields who want to benefit from this approach to data to make a difference in the standards of practice in their community.