Morphology: Crash Course Linguistics #2
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ก.ย. 2020
- What even is a word? Well… linguists don’t really know! But that’s ok! When linguists want to get super specific, we don’t even talk about words, we talk about morphemes instead. In this episode of Crash Course Linguistics, we’re diving into the topic of morphology and what makes up these things we call words.
Want even more linguistics? Check out the Lingthusiasm podcast, hosted by the writers of Crash Course Linguistics: lingthusiasm.com/
Check out Self-Evident on PBS Voices: • How Musicians are Soun...
Acknowledgements: Daniela Diedrich, William Forshaw, Hannah Gibson, Diane Lillo-Martin
***
Watch our videos and review your learning with the Crash Course App!
Download here for Apple Devices: apple.co/3d4eyZo
Download here for Android Devices: bit.ly/2SrDulJ
Crash Course is on Patreon! You can support us directly by signing up at / crashcourse
Thanks to the following patrons for their generous monthly contributions that help keep Crash Course free for everyone forever:
Catherine Conroy, Patty Laqua, Leonora Rossé Muñoz, Stephen Saar, John Lee, Phil Simmons, Alexander Thomson, Mark & Susan Billian, Junrong Eric Zhu, Alan Bridgeman, Jennifer Smith, Matt Curls, Tim Kwist, Ron Lin, Jonathan Zbikowski. Jennifer Killen, Sarah & Nathan Catchings, Brandon Westmoreland, team dorsey, Trevin Beattie, Eric Prestemon, Sam Ferguson, Yasenia Cruz, Eric Koslow, Indika Siriwardena, Khaled El Shalakany, Shawn Arnold, Tom Trval, Siobhán, Ken Penttinen, Nathan Taylor, William McGraw, Justin Zingsheim, Andrei Krishkevich, Jirat, Brian Thomas Gossett, SR Foxley, Ian Dundore, Jason A Saslow, Jessica Wode, Mark, Caleb Weeks, Sam Buck
--
Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook - / youtubecrashcourse
Twitter - / thecrashcourse
Tumblr - / thecrashcourse
Support Crash Course on Patreon: / crashcourse
CC Kids: / crashcoursekids
![บุกร้านไอศกรีม VJ วุ้นเส้น !!!! [ดูคลิปเต็มหน้าช่อง] #Short | PANG ORNHIRA](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/g549nEhKZdc/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm rather whelmed. Not overwhelmed, not underwhelmed. Just casually whelmed.
Whelmed and overwhelmed are synonyms.
I feel that.
@@andrew_ray Yep, was about to say, whether you're overwhelmed or just "whelmed" it still means your ship has lost the battle against the waves.
As the swedish might say, lagom whelmed
IONATVS I’m in a ship now? Dammit. I need to start paying more attention.
Video: What is a word?
Linguists: * starts sweating profusely *
I’m just...so happy this series now exists
Me too! My inner nerd is satisfied.
im so happy iv seen that hair
soundlyawake I stumbled upon this by accident. Now I’m stumbling into it with reckless abandon. It’s great.
When she said Deutschewörterübersetzungsproblem without any problem. I honestly was super surprised! Well done, fellow linguist.
Greetings from Germany
Fun fact: I'm half German! but the only parts of the language I know is how to sing the song "silent night" in German, and the words my grandpa used to say after a tasty meal: "schmeckt gut!"
The majority of linguistics students must know just one triliteral root in Arabic: k-t-b. I swear this is the only example ever used in introductory materials.
Yep, that's what we had in syntax
I can't speak for Arabic, but I know that in Hebrew KTB is one of those rare roots that can be conjugated in every way possible. Most roots can be conjugated in most but not all of the "patterns" so KTB makes it easier to present the concept.
I think that's because it's a regular transitive verb, so you can show the passive and causative forms relatively easily.
One of our writers studied Arabic for a couple years, so we considered using a different root, but y'know, sometimes you might as well just familiarize people with a classic example
Sign language often gets overlooked when talking about languages, so I really enjoy that this series talks about it :)
" _talking_ about languages"
@@ElfRulerr If a group of deaf people are writing facebook messsangers about linguistics to each other, are they "talking" about linguistics or "writing" about linguistics?
aren't sign language in group of artificial language? they aren't really useful in studying the nature of language in that sense
@@oldcowbb An artificial language is a language that was consciously created for a certain purpose. Sign language isn't like that. It emerged among groups of deaf people, has complex grammatical structures, and continuously evolves over time, just like spoken languages. They're useful in studying the nature of language because of that.
@@oldcowbb They appear without the influence of oral language and develop naturally. Sign languages are just as natural as spoken languages.
For the example in Arabic, this is how the words change:
Kataba (he wrote) كَتَبَ
Katabat (she wrote) كَتَبَتْ
Kotoob (books) كُتُب
Kitaab (book) كِتاب
Kaatib (male-writer) كاتِب
Kaatiba (female-writer) كاتِبة
Kottaab (writers) كُتَّاب
Kitaaba (writing) كِتابَة
Mektoob (written) مَكْتوب
Mektaba (library) مَكْتبة
Maktabi (librarian) مَكْتبيّ
All of this from 3 letters ktb ك ت ب or كتب + vowels that sometimes work as normal letters ا و ي and El harakat tashkiliya (i don't know the translation) which are like short vowels and are added on top(or below) a letter: َ short a ا, ِ short i ي, ُ short o ْضمّة damma, ْ stop sokoon.
Then there is a small laying three (3):
ّ shedda or stress.
El hemza, this little ء that is like a glotal stop which is added only to the letter ا to make a َأ or e إِ...
I can go on but my comment will turn into a grammar book. Just to show how Arabic is cool (in a complicated) way.
Ayyy arabic speakers represent! I love the root system we have, it’s ingenious. Might be a little confusing for new learners, but it’s so useful for picking up new vocabulary!
@Language and Programming Channel ليست صعبة أحيانًا؟ 😹 ما زلت أحاول أن اتعلمها بشكل كامل حتى و انا درستها في صغري. و لكنني فعلاً احب اللغة
NONCONCATENATIVE MOR0HOLOGY FOR THE WIN!
It always fascinates me how similar Arabic and Hebrew are! We also use KTB(v) consonants for “write” but they look like: כתב
These letters combined with various vowels, prefixes, & suffixes make up
He writes: כותב
She writes: כותבת
To write: לכתוב
Writing (noun): כתב
Holy parchment (used only for Torah and other specific religious writings): כתב סת״ם
Even something like marriage contract: כתובה
I didn’t bother with the vowels but as an example “he writes” would look like ”כּוֹתֵב” with nikud (dots and dashes used to show vowels - I think they’re called diacritics?)
I think that the English word for ( El Harakat Attashkiliya ) is " DIACRITIC " but I beg to differ and say that the explanation you provided sounds unfounded :
The vowels have no true effect to change the meaning of a word as you mentioned above . In Arabic language , words may be changed or rather derived through MODELS التفعلة = قوالب and this leads to what is so called AL ISHTI9A9 , الإشتقاق
(فعل . فاعل .مفعول . .فعول .فعيل .فعلان . مستفعل إلى أخره )
An arabic word forms according to those MODELS قوالب . Sometimes comprising prefixes , infixes or sufixes , حروف الزيادة or to pronouns الضمائر
Ambiguity is one of my favorite features of language, it’s what leads to music, art, and poetry.
One language sets you in a corridor for life. Two languages open every door along the way. I wish everybody good luck with opening new doors in their life 🍀
how many do you speak? (and which)
@@FlamingBasketballClub Thank you for such a wishing . All the same !
@Star Star What do you mean by "artificial"?
Yeah, which is probably why Karens refuse to listen to anyone else.
(edit) I forgot the copula. Sorry, I'm not a native English speaker.
My mind was blown just from the untwistable (not twistable) vs untwistable (able to be untwisted).
I'm loving the series so far! Excited to see more. Thanks!
+ yeah me too! Not a word that often so I don’t think about it. But I think you’d differentiate the two meanings with emphasis on pronunciation. Or maybe just wouldn’t use it to mean “able to be untwisted”. I would just use the phrase.
@@trace_tomorrow i have never seen untwistable used as "able to be untwisted" tho, which really confused me
this happens because the prefix happens to be the opposite of the suffix. i wonder how many more such words there are... also, i could imagine this becoming a sorta psychological experiment where words with conflicting affixes are used to test linguistic cognition in some way.
@@alveolate but is it a real word if no one uses that way? language isn't just adding prefixes and getting words, not all of them are used so they arent words
Oh, thanks i got it because of your comment
I love love LOVE that you include signed languages in your teaching. It's so important.
Yes it’s great. A subset of that greatness is that I just learned that the ASL sign for “learning” is miming an open book with one hand, grabbing its contents with the other, and smushing them into your brain :D
Merriam-Webster has three requirements to add a word to the dictionary:
1) Part of speech (noun, verb, etc.)
2) Clear definition
3) Widespread, sustained use
'Hangry' meets all those requirements, so although it's listed as 'informal', it *is* in there.
It’s interesting how English has so many negative prefixes (anti-, dis-, mis-, just to name a few) and only one commonly used positive prefix, pro-.
6:15 reminded me of Robin from Young Justice, "You're overwhelmed. Freeze was underwhelmed. Why isn't anyone just whelmed?"
My favorite bound root is the one in underwhelmed and overwhelmed. I found it funny that you can find something overwhelming (too much to handle) or underwhelming (unimpressive) which work quite well as opposites. But you can't be merely "whelmed".
@Jule I went to the comment hoping to find this, and you did not disappoint! :)
But here's the thing. It kind of is its own word. It's not useful, and it's not in the dictionary. But you could say you're feeling "whelmed," and you have a good chance of being understood.
although, whelmed is actually a word. to whelm means "to engulf, submerge, or bury". it's not commonly used, i had to look it up to see if it was a word, but it turns out it is
My favorite one is "-bot" because although it was originally just a syllable in a word, people now use it like a derivational suffix.
Very cool that you're including sign language in your list of examples! Really interested to see how it ties into the different fields!
"-ceive" is an example of my favourite kind of bound morphemes, i.e. a cranberry morpheme, where the bound morpheme (in this case "-ceive") doesn't have any independent meaning but is still used in word-formation. Same thing with "-mit", as in "permit", "transmit", etc. where the "-mit" now no longer has any independent meaning, or, the titular "cran-" in "cranberry".
Typically these did used to be morphemes with independent meaning (like "cob" in "cobweb", although some English dialects do still use "cob" to mean spider, but not the "standard" language), but because the independent roots now only survive in compound roots, or because they only came into the language as part of compound root, they lost their independent meaning.
In both of these cases, the bound morpheme was a free one in Latin but got borrowed into English already in compound forms.
@@varana True, and I did mention that later on as a condition for the rise of a cranberry morpheme. The "cob" in "cobweb", though, is an example of the first condition (native free morpheme that fell out of use)
@@varana I think it's rather later and from a French variety: 'permit' and 'transmit' exist exactly as such in a third person singular of 'permettre' and 'transmettre' with the root being {mett-} and the infinitive indicator {-re} So: «Le servant transmit la lettre.» "(The) servant (has) transmitt(ed) (the) letter." Note how there are no germanic/Old English roots in this sentence. ('Have' as an auxiliary only to indicate past tense.) It is likely that the French words where adopted in this 3rd person form, since it is more common to speak about something in a foreign language (especially with a French lord) than about oneself or to a second person.
Why cranberry though? Is this another new modern way of trying to make something memorable by creating a silly comparison (similarly like acronim creation is now the new best thing?)
@@JinJinDoe The "cran" in "cranberry" is a cranberry morpheme, that's all really
5:11 just blew my mind!
Same! I paused the video and just sat with it for a bit. Letting the ambiguity tease my mind!
Wait until you start breaking apart the lexemes of highly agglutinating languages like Finnish lol they get pretty wild
For example: aasiankeisarikalastaja = aasia "Asia" + n (genitive marker) + keisari "kaiser" + kala "fish" + staa (forms verbs meaning "to catch") + ja (forms agent nouns) = Asian king fish catch er = crested kingfisher (bird from Asia). It gets even more complicated with some of the Native American languages that exhibit full polysynthetic constructions where packs of morphemes and lexemes are stacked onto either end of the verb and you end up with entire sentences that are one word. That's actually the part of linguistics I find most interesting.
It's interesting that you find agglutinativity interesting, because as a native speaker of an agglutinative language, I found fusional languages like Latin to be interesting.
If you only ever heard French and never saw it written down, you'd swear it was highly agglutinative. All these words get pronounced together, influencing each other!
I didnt get it 😶
I'm glad you decided to make this series.This episode has already exceeded my expectations.
I don't like how unrabbity this video is.
6:18 I am very whelmed by this statement
I'm studying English and I just failed a Linguistics exam that included topics like morphology, so this video helps a lot to understand it!! ☺️
good luck in studying!
@@shatandv thank you!! 🙈
*- My notes -* (Sorry if they're confusing, I probably have a weird way of taking notes-)
- Just because a word isn't in a divinatory doesn't mean it isn't a word (stupid me)
- Dictionary-makers define one entry/unit as the largest unpredictable combinations of form and meaning
- They call these units lexemes/lexical items; they're the parts of a lexicon (another word for dictionary)
- Rabbit and -s are examples of the smallest unpredictable combinations of form + meaning
- Linguists call these units morphemes; study of them is morphology
- Morph = Metamorphosis, Animorphs
- Morph is from a Greek word meaning shape/form
- Morphemes can stick together to change the meaning of a word
- A free morpheme is a morpheme that can stand by itself
- A compound is two or more morphemes together
- A bound morpheme is something that doesn't have its own independent meaning
- A bound root is a bound morpheme which is a root word
- If something is after the root word, it's a suffix
- If something is before the root word, it's a prefix
- If something is in a root word, it's an infix
- Circumfixes is information at both the beginning and end of a word
- An affix holding more than one piece of information is fusional morphology
This is GREAT. I hope you do this for every upcoming episode... please :)
I would say that the "s" in "rabbits" has a meaning (plural marker); it just can't stand alone as a lexeme, just like the "ceive" and unlike "rabbit," which can stand alone.
great, thanks for doing this.
"A bound morpheme is something that doesn't have its own independent meaning" it does have a meaning, but can't be used alone?
@@sei531 the -s in rabbits conveys meaning, but it must be connected to the noun it makes plural. This -s is different from the -s in eats, but again, this -s, as well as -ing and -ed, must be bound to the verb it is modifying.
Wow ! Thanks.
I'm super excited for when they make more! I love linguistics and this is doing really well to teach me the terminology, and learn a couple things in ASL :)
I've been so hyped for this episode! I already understand morphology, but this breaks down morphology so well
Thank you for starting this series! It's awesome to see people talk about language in a more scientific way!
You are right that a lexeme (or a lemma) is a word viewed as an item in a list. In your words, a word viewed as a dictionary entry. However, "the United States" and "the European Union" are not a lexeme in that sense. They are more like word sequences viewed as items in a list of geo names. Movie titles often falls into this category: "The Sound of Music" is a movie title and it names a particular movie in Amazon's movie catalog. This fact is very relevant for speech recognizers since lists of lexical items ("domains") must be known by speech recognizers for them to properly guess which word comes after "play the trailer of the sound of...". Language analysers (parsers and interpreters) also need to take these word sequences as a single lexical unit, otherwise they cannot determine which video to play. Here we should separate the notion of lexical words (the name of some phenomenon realized in a wording) from the notion of grammatical words (a unit composed of morphemes in a standard way). Outside of NLP, it is useful to recognize "the sound of music" as a movie title, and it is also useful to recognise the individual words to get a feeling of what the movie is about. Both ways of viewing the same wording are fine.
This series is EVERYTHING. Thank you.
Love that you include sign languages. I just want to let you know, your point about nouns and verbs was valid, but your handshape for chair and sit was incorrect. It should be two H handshapes (or the first two fingers). I noticed the non dominant hand only contained the index and NOT the middle finger.
it might be a regional thing. My deaf friend back in high school pointed out several signs that he used and knew that differed from the official ASL.
Joel Feila regional signs exist for things like strawberry and birthday, but sit is not known to have regional sign variants.
Also the palm direction is incorrect! It should face down on the non-dominant hand, not in. I noticed this as well
So far two great episodes. I am loving this.
"Can you just ceive?", I think you can in Europe.
Yes, more specifically in latin where the english translation is 'get'
Or, for that matter, "procieve"?
@@EcthrisDevastatia The verb is "capere" (principle parts capio, capere, cepi, & captus), which is better translated as "to take" than simply "to get". It's a little harder to recognize in English because the 'a' turned into 'i' or 'e' in its compound derivatives in Latin, becoming prefix + -cipio/-cipere/-cepi/-ceptus, and then going through the medieval Norman French dialect before it made it to English, further disguising its connection. It also has more transparent non-"-ceive/-cept" derivatives in English as well, such as "captive" and "capture," but they came into English later through direct borrowing from Latin, and are not transparently related, so while they would count "-cept" and "capt-" would count as variants of the same morpheme in their native Latin, they are different morphemes for all useful intents and purposes in English.
@@MichaelHopcroft It's not an accepted lexeme, and certainly wasn't one the Romans used, from the morphemes involved you can deduce that it would literally mean "to take for/on behalf of" so I could see it being used to mean "to take [something bad] on behalf of [someone else]" (ie "to protect/shield [an ally/patron/client/etc]"). Or just as a nice euphemism for stealing.
If it's not an awesome 10 things I hate about you reference, then I know nothing
Oh! Thank you so much
I was waiting for this episode
This video is fantastic. Informative, easy to follow, and extremely fun.
I’ve been waiting forever for you to make a crash course on this topic. Would love to see more in other languages
This is amazing thank you so much 😍
When i was in school i always wanted to do a language-related major but i ended up in nursing school. Now I’m sitting in the ER bored with no incoming cases and I’m watching this for entertainment.
Looking forward for the next lessons
keep em coming!!
im taking a rhetorical theory class right now and its nice to hear about the more technical side of language
There is an abundance of information available on the internet (huge understatement)...These videos are well written, informative, and entertaining...Thanks, Crash Course!...Keep up the good work...
I'm living for this series!!!
Great video! Thank you so much for creating this! Looking forward to seeing even more videos on Linguistics! Would love to see a series on the history of languages, like writing for example, and Latin :-)
FINALLY! I am so glad you started a linguistics series. Thank you! *happy tears*
This is an amazing series and I am loving it
"Deutschwörterübersetzungsproblem" is a beautiful word.
Ein herzliches Dankeschön an die Internetvideoproduzenten von Crash Course für die tollen Weiterbildungsgrundkursvideoserien, dank euch kann ich immer meinen Allgemeinbildungserweiterungswissensdurst stillen!
Bitte nichts
That's not Geeko, is it?
In Croatian there is a sentence “Gore gore gore gore gore” which means when translated to english “uphills are burning worse.
1st gore means: Up
2nd gore means:worse
3rd gore means: are burning
4th gore means: hills or a top of a mounatin
5th gore means the same as the 2nd gore
llama! llama la llama
A ship-shipping ship ships shipping-ships.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Police police Police police police police Police police.
Can-can can-can can can can can can-can.
Will, will Will will Will Will's will?
Rose rose to put rose roes on her rows of roses.
That that is, is. That that is not, is not. Is that it? It is.
i. la .lojban. claxu ti poi nonselsmu
In Finnish a whole discussion can basically be written with the words "kokko" and "koko"
Kokoa kokoon koko kokko.
Koko kokkoko?
Koko kokko.
Wenn Fliegen hinter Fliegen fliegen, fliegen Fliegen Fliegen nach.
Love, love linguistics. So happy CC is finally doing a linguistics course!
Have you studied much Linguistics before? :)
This video was abso-hecking-lutely entertaining to watch!
I really really love this series and I'm so looking forward to the next one (and he next one, and the next...)! If I may give one bit of feedback, it would be that it's too fast - I'm completely new to linguistics and I just can't process everything quick enough!
That's great! Wonderfully condensed video. I've studied French, English and Italian linguistics. (I am German... we love our long combined nouns.)
Thank you! So helpful
Definitely using this to supplement my morphology lecture 😄
Ooh Malay! Many of those on the list are pretty similar in function - "per" refers to the person/noun whose job is to Do The Thing (e.g. "main" - play, "permainan" - game), "ber" is the general action of Doing The Thing (without any attention to temporality, i.e. we don't care when this is happening), "se" is often a singular, "ke" is turning a verb into a noun. The suffix tends to be dependent on the root word's spelling (though sometimes the prefix changes spelling depending on the root too).
Here's a good explainer of "mer" (which wasn't in that list and tends to refer to "this specific instance of Doing The Thing that we're discussing right now as opposed to the general action of Doing The Thing): www.quora.com/What-are-the-differences-between-the-Indonesian-circumfixes-me-kan-and-me-i-and-how-do-they-differ-from-the-prefix-me
True, but also 'pe-' that refers to the person who's Doing The Thing; 'Pe-main'.
I loooove this videeeooo 🤩🤩 I'm so happy for this series 😎👏🏽🎉
Great episode very instructive.👍
Thank you, this actually helped a bunch!
This series is SICK, and so rabbity
VERY educational. Thanks
knowing what counts as a word is important in transliterating languages which don't usually notate word divisions. i transliterate japanese song lyrics in romaji to make it easier for non-speakers to follow along, but there are lots of places where people have different practices on word division. to make matters worse, japanese has, in addition to compound words, many "rengo", words that frequently occur together whose meaning is usually determinable from the parts but are important enough to be listed in the dictionary. some transliterators write rengo as separate words, some people write them like compounds, and others do it inconsistently.
I have an old friend who learned Japanese specifically so they could translate a particular manga called "Bokuro no Mint" -- "We are Mint". It sounded to me like "We're Minty!", which annoyed them no end. As an anime fan watching raw tapes in the 1990s when there was a thriving trade in the things, some of the ads were hilarious when the words were misheard, like "I love the Koala Machine!"
Thanks for this!
A small point regarding Semitic roots - they are not composed only from consonants, they may include sonants as well (consider B.Y.T which is the root for *house* which has that Y in it's middle).
The main difference is that roots in Semitic languages hold a broader semantic meaning than stems and that the "afix" for Semitic languages is the Form (although they utilize other affixes as well).
Form decides the phonetic organization of the root in order to create a meaning or "word" (rather than the abstract notion which is a root). Combine the root B.Y.T. with the form XaXiX which creates the word "house" as in BaYiT.
This means that Forms also carry a semantic meaning of their own like in XaXiX may mean "a thing of the infused root" like in BaYiT and ZaYiT (olive) and SHaYiT (cruise) and so on.
I know this may seem like a side note, but I think it's important as it creates a unique net of connections between roots in Semitic languages which I'm not familiar with in other languages and in turn may suggest that this connectivity exist in out language processing however is buried deeper for all the non-Semitic languages
Holy crap, I love this series.
I always thought it was go going gone/went. The conjugation of ir in Spanish makes more sense to me 😂 thank you crash course, for reigniting my love of language structure!
I love this!!! Linguistics is amazing
Agreed! :D
Currently watching this two days before my state exams in linguistics. Wish me luck!
Thank you for this series! 📖 my notebook is filling up quickly. I press rewind and pause at least ten times per video 😂
Yes, linguistics! I love it!
I can't believe how complex all of this is how did we even learn this to begin with OMG!
So happy this series is a thing.
Me too! :D
Awesome! So happy to see this, it was excellently done and very pretty! A+ from me on the fonts and colours!
I’m studying danish at Uni and this is what we are studying atm. It’s very interesting
I can not fangirl enough about this series!
Bro this video just blew my mind 🤯
5:35 I have a new entry into the list of favorite autocontranyms
"rabb doesn't mean anything"
Rabb: *sad noises
But oddly, rabbi does.
Well depending on how you interpret the pronunciation it could mean "God" in Punjabi
Of course, it's also useful to know that there are linguists who consider morphemes a myth, a wrongheaded idea that seemed like it should work and therefore caught on in the field but which begins to strain under even slight scrutiny (null morphemes and heavy reanalysis being obvious). I like to think of it as being analogous to the beginning of the quantum era in physics, where a problem with the standard model is known but it's taking a lot of effort to fix it (with Construction Grammar being the best candidate at the moment) and in the mean time it remains extraordinarily useful.
"for the completionists out there" aha! i knew this series was made explicitly for me!
Amazing, that's really awesome language.
The more I watch it the more I understand. Thank you for this video
HELL YEAH ANIMORPHS REFERENCE 💜✨
This is such an important thing when learning some other languages, like Japanese. In Japanese verbs are very agglutinative, meaning that they string together a bunch of morphemes to make potentially long but specific meanings. For example, "taberu" ("to eat") can become the negative past progressive "tabete imasen deshita" ("I did not eat"). Different sources will insert or remove spaces, so "tabete imasendeshita" is equally valid. I spent a long time early on learning trying to figure out where words actually end, and it's something I've noticed from other English speaking learners too. Being able to let go of the idea of sorting these elements into words and instead sorting them into morphemes really makes things a lot, lot easier.
I LOVE THIS SO MUCH I couldn't go to college to study linguistics because of covid, so its nice to have a little something. For anyone else desperately missing it, check out Stephen Pinker's lectures
looks like we're doing syntax next, going up from morphology instead of down to phonology and phonetics. saving the best for last i see!
You could make an episode on constructed languages. It would be really interesting.
It's Morpheme Time!
nice
wish i can come across this video when i was little
now everything makes senses
As a native Malay speaker I should've seen the circumfixes coming. Malay has so many affixes it drives me crazy.
My favorite crash course 👏
0:34 I'm form the future and the word hangry is official now thanks to oxford.
Thx a lot.
I have a graduation in English, and this was the best class I've ever had
Please start a series to teach foreign languages using grammar and linguistics 🤩🤩 most people just focus on vocubulary, but learning how words are formed might be a HUGE help
I'm willing to give this series a chance.
This takes me back to my English Language A-Level.
Thank you for this video!! I am still sooo confused lol but thank you
Hebrew is interesting as well because sometimes these root consonants can change! For example, the word for _request_ is ביקש, or [biˈkeʃ] in IPA. Specifically, that means "he requested". If I want to say "I requested", I'll say ביקשתי /biˈkaʃti/. But if I want to say "I _will_ request", I'll say אבקש [avaˈkeʃ].
Remember Hebrew is written right-to-left, and (usually) only writes the consonants. So, literally, these are spelled B-Y-K-Sh, B-Y-K-Sh-T-Y, and ʔ-B-K-Sh.
The letter ב has two pronunciations, [b] and [v], depending on context! You have to know Hebrew grammar to predict it. For example, 'thing' דבר is [daˈvar], but 'he spoke' דיבר is [diˈber]. As we've already seen, it can change even within conjugations of the same word.
(The dictionary form of Hebrew verbs, by convention, is past tense masculine. This is because it's the simplest conjugation.)
In Modern Israeli Hebrew, the letter ח is [χ], the letter ק is [k], and the letter כ is sometimes [k] and sometimes [χ]. This leads to weird situations where 'I will sell' is [emˈkoʁ], 'I will stab' is [edˈkoʁ], and 'I will choose' is [evˈχaʁ], but in the past tense 'he sold' is [maˈχaʁ], 'he stabbed' is [daˈkaʁ], and 'he chose' is [baˈχaʁ]. One verb has the "mutatable" consonant, and the other two don't. (Sorry for the word choice! Couldn't think of a better example.)
EDIT: This is a bad font. It makes the Greek letter χ look like the Latin letter x. All of the above should be the Greek one, which represents the voiceless uvular fricative!
EDIT EDIT: [evˈχaʁ] doesn't rhyme with the rest of them because the letter ח changes the vowels surrounding it
EDIT EDIT EDIT: The historical reason for this is that ח used to be [ħ], ק used to be [q], and כ used to be [k] which weakens to [χ] allophonically between vowels except when gemminated. Over time, gemmination disappeared (and consequently weakening became less predictable) and lots of consonants merged. (There are dialects that still maintain these distinctions.)
I like adding “ically” to “antidisestablishmentarianism”.
It's strange, because as a german, I'm pretty used to put loads of words into one big word. But it only really works with Nouns. The "ically" makes it an addictive. If I try to put the german counterpart of "ically" behind it, it toatally breaks down the rest. I can build "Antidisestablishmentismus" without a problem but making it an addictive really only works by changing the word establishment.
@@melonlord1414 *adjective ;)
@@solar0wind that was auto correct 😅
@@melonlord1414 Yeah, I figured, but it made your comment hard to understand, so I wanted to point it out😊
I didnt get it. 😶
The example for "chair" vs. "sit" in ASL went by almost too fast for me to notice the difference between the gestures. Maybe explicitly point out the difference the next time you do something like that.
I need moreeeeeee
I love this, just one suggestion though: please say the word while you’re signing, so I don’t have to try to read the word on screen and look at your sign at the same time.
this is not television; you can read the word, loop back a few seconds, and look at the gesture...
(edit: that is, because lip movement is part of gestures in many sign lanugages, and those do not necessarily correlate to the lip movement needed to form words in the corresponding spoken language)
@@LupinoArts how does one simcom (sign and speak at the same time), then? Perhaps this isn't that big of a problem in PSE?
@@LupinoArts it wouldn't necessarily need to be at the same time. she could say it in english after, like she did for arabic in this episode. looping back to read it might not be doable or practical for everyone
@@NijiRanger That's a great idea, as it wouldn't interfere with correctly signing the word but it would let people who are partially sighted or blind know what word she was talking about.
Hello!
Incredibly interesting course!
Is there a database about the words and their history and evolution!
I
By the time I get to the intro, I get a feeling that I’ve kind of seen this before, by the same writer but a different presenter. 😁
In Afrikaans we get compounding compounds where a word group consisting of an adjective and a noun is joined with another noun eg. tweedehandsehandelaarsforum (second hand traders forum)