{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014072847682119206, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011589403973509934, 'mean_word_length': 5.679558011049724, '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}}
Modelling Language Standardization

In this chapter, I outline the development of some of the most widely used models of standardization and consider the extent to which they are able to account for the complexities of the standardization process and its different manifestations in diverse linguistic, historical and sociocultural contexts. The 2010s witnessed a renewed interest in standardization and the publication of a host of works addressing current questions such as restandardization or the applicability of models of standardization to minority and minoritized languages,1 as well as book-length studies of individual languages.2 Since standard language ideology has traditionally been associated with nationalist aspirations and identity politics, with its roots in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, recent studies have also questioned whether, in a postmodern world, with greater democratization and social change, the role of standard languages is weakening and the boundary between standard and non-standard is becoming less well defined (cf. Lüdi 2012: 217). All of this work has sharpened the need to reconsider the appropriateness of existing models and raised questions 1