{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017497812773403325, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.021052631578947, '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}}
Word Formation, Borrowing and their Interaction

Word formation and borrowing can both be used to create neologisms. Their interaction is a topic that has not been widely discussed, because they have generally been assigned to different domains of linguistics. The study of word formation is usually considered part of the domain of morphology, whereas the study of borrowing has been undertaken partly in lexicography and etymology, partly in sociolinguistics and language policy. 
Word formation and borrowing are both responses to naming needs. As such they can be in competition. The competition is quite unequal, however, because the two processes operate very differently. Whereas a borrowing is based on an individual expression (typically a word) from another language, word formation is based on the application of rules to existing lexical material. When we consider the origin of a particular word, it is not always straightforward to determine whether the word is the result of borrowing or word formation. In some cases, the two processes may in fact both be involved and the relative contribution of each may vary among speakers.