A course in Cognitive Linguistics: Usage-based linguistics 

Thank you for the new episode.

Great help for understanding

Once again your video has saved me! Thank you for the content and great explanation :)

I've just passed a final exam in linguistics a few days ago and your videos helped a lot in understanding the material, thank you so much!

I think the existence of the irrealis "were" is a good argument for diachrony. Huddleston/Pullum (2005) call it "an untidy relic of an earlier system". Some people call the 3rd person singular -s a linguistic fossil, although it does help differentiate between: Steven, go to school. and *Steven go to school. (Steven goes to school)

Thanks for yet another interesting and highly informative video. For some reason, the Hermann Paul quote reminded me of sociolinguistic accommodation. Would be interesting to see if this phenomenon is going to be given more attention by cognitive linguists now, what with the development of cognitive sociolinguistics / social cognitive linguistics that is going on these days.

Great video. Thank you so much for sharing this with us

Great channel, really.

What night mares ride upon the lingual landscape, the Dreamer or the Dreamt? What cognitive cat claws across this manic modality, the Screamer or the Screamt... betrayed by analogy.

Thank you for the video. it was really helpful.

Thanks for this interesting lecture, what about usage-based semantics?

Ein wirklich sehr hilfreiches Video - hat mir enorm bei der Vorbereitung auf mein Staatsexamen geholfen! :)

Cheers for the video! I have a term paper due where I have to analyse the Poverty of Stimulus argument from an usage-based perspective. Including an evaluation of 5 research studies, also from an usage-based perspective. Though one!

what are the approaches in theorizing linguistics??

I can’t find the mentioned vid on ‘analogy’. Would you please drop a link in the description, Martin? Thanks.

My dad, a linguist, made the following comment: "You are familiar with the “Greenberg Universals”? Generative grammarians don’t take those seriously - I thought it was interesting how Hilpert wove those into his lecture #7 as universals - but he didn’t mention Greenberg." Can you respond to this?