{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018996960486322188, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0022796352583586625, 'mean_word_length': 5.424390243902439, '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}}
Language description and use

The process of blending seems to occur in all languages, to be very common in them, and to occur in every stage of the language's development. The voluminous scholarship on this very old process displays wide disagreement on terminology, definition, scope, and place within a modern taxonomy. Analysis of the six broad patterns exhibited by 132 recent written English blends, together with a refined definition, helps to show the dynamic role of blending in word formation and language development, and the interrelations with derivation and compounding. Present phonological and wordformation rules cannot account for these blends, which considerably complicate any viable theory of the lexicon. The untabulated number of contemporary oral and written blends is evidently huge, with slips and other oral nonce forms pouring out from perhaps millions of businesses and persons who are enjoyably indulging their linguistic individuality in a way that perhaps no other wordforming process can challenge. Paradoxically, despite this enormous, ever-growing popularity, blending mainly produces oral forms that quickly die. The process has not significantly expanded the English lexicon; but blends are important and diverse, and one of the most intricate of all the word-forming categories.