{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0216998191681736, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.116022099447513, '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}}
Critical appraisement of Monitor Model

Great linguist Sir Stephen Krashen has developed the most famous second language acquisition theory (SLA) which is also known as the ‘Krashen’s Monitor Model’. ‘Monitor Model’ is important to understand the connection between second language acquisition and learning that gets shown in the outcome of the speaker. Krashen’s Monitor Model is one of the hypotheses from his second language acquisition theories. Although Krashen is known for his theories on SLA and he is seminal on that, this particular model also applies to first language adoption. The idea of the monitor hypothesis holds some criticism for being inadequate. The 'Monitor Hypothesis' doesn't really go into detail concerning implicit rules or how monitoring functions in them. Krashen did not define in his hypothesis whether adults and children would take the same amount of time to edit their mistakes. Also, there lies a vague perception about monitoring for the people who are physically active but mentally challenged. These are the lacking that needs to be explained in ‘monitor hypotheses’.