Professor Martin: I am adjunct instructor at a community college. I teach an introductory course on Linguistics. I love the structure you prepare this lecture. In particular I love the clarity and slow speed with which you deliver the concepts. Usually I honestly do not like lectures - one way communications, but your lecture keep me alert and interested. Thank you!
You're very welcome. I find that working with different textbooks and other resources can be very helpful. I sometimes need to hear things explained in at least two different ways before I understand them...
Dear Mr. Hilpert, My most sincere congratulations for such a clear and precise lecture. I am ever so grateful to you for sharing your knowledge in such an exquisite manner. It's very generous on your behalf.
i think english linguistics is the most difficult course in english reletive majors,more difficult than grammar,reading etc.And it must be difficult for native speakers to learn it,so u can imagine how non-native speakers learn it.
Hi, I am a senior student in college. After graduation, we have to take a linguistics exam to be an English teacher. Linguistics is really difficult to me and I didn't want to study linguistics books with so much information. They are so complicated. When I was searching on Internet desperately, I found your videos. You are really really good teacher. :) Thank you so much for sharing them :) :)
Mr Hilpert, thank you so much for putting this up. I'm a Computer Science student, but is this really eye-opening in regard to online communication, especially with meme culture.
Thanks Martin for your effort!! Great introduction and I will continue watching your videos on your channel starting now. I wish they had some kind of numbers in the titles though, so we could watch them sequentially as your "course" is obviously intended to be.
I would like to express my appreciation for such an oustanding and clear lecture for beginners in this discipline of linguistics for foreign language skeakers
Please I want a short answer to these questions. ............ 1)What's language? Or mention the description of language & it's characteristic? .......... 2)Compare & contrast between spoken and written language? ....... 3)Differentiate between phonology and phonetics? ........ 4)Give analysis of the rules of language and exemplify? ......... 5)what the difference between grammar syntax and phonology ? .................. 😊😊😊
have just discovered your videos. better late than never as we say. they are really informative and beneficial. spent whole night watching and taking my notes. my major is translation and i teach translation theory. if please you have any introductory videos in this domain so i can use them for my students. thank you very much.
+lahsen Bouchichit Many thanks for your feedback, I'm glad you find the videos useful. I haven't done anything specifically on translation just yet. I'll let you know when I get around to that!
Hello, I just stumbled upon your videos and they are amazing! Thank you!! I'm going to watch them one by one. Concerning WUG, GUTCH, NIZ, and HEAF, I was wondering how it works in German. If you give me a random German-sounding senseless noun, I wouldn't know the plural form unless it is obvious from the ending (like der ...er, die ...ung, das ...chen, etc.). Would it work effortlessly in the brains of German speakers, even if the word doesn't have a typical ending?
Professor I 'm not sure if you answer questions here, but I'm going to give it a try and ask you a question I have been wanting to ask a professional linguistic for a long time: Are things like "Modal Semantics", "Semantic externalism","Reference" and other fancy ideas related to language, developed by philosophers taken seriously in contemporaneity linguistics? Or do linguists brush off these ideas as non-sequitur or even non-sense? are they worth looking into?
Dr. Martin Hilpert sir , i need one deep help from you, please suggest me a research topic which should support english and linguistics both . Please ....
My impression is that you are a native English speaker on account of your excellent speaking. However, I notice that your computer language is in French. Additionally, in some of your videos, I get the impression that your pronunciation in many other languages is also very good (though I cannot say for certain since I do not speak those languages). So may I ask you this: what do you consider to be your first language?
Hello everyone! I am looking for those interested in exploring Yi philosophy of original Chinese and English wise = wai【围｜维】 + si【是】, original meaning is sundial wipe = wai【围】+ pe【泼】 rise = sai【垂】+ si【是】 rite = sai【瑞】+ te【捝】 wide = wai【围】 + de【得】 quantity = quan - kwang【匡】+ ti - te【捝】 + ty - tye【剔】 bird = bir - be【畀】 + de【突｜凸】 birth = bir - be【畀】 + si【撕｜厶】，th - te【脱】+ h【合｜核】 win = we【获】 + ying【赢】 guard = ge【戈｜個】+ a【押】+ de【得】 you = yi【移】+ wu【 唔】 who = hu【呼】 why = wai【为】，we【或】+ gai【该】 lay = lo【落】 + hei【後】 ...
Thank you so much, my academic major is English Language. I've got Introduction to Linguistics this semester and I'm trying my best to get the hang of it. :) I'm studying the book "The Study of Language, Fourth Edition." It's a bit different from what I've seen here.
Sehr gut! Ich arbeite mit dem ICM (bzw. der Variante IEE) in den Einführungen (sind hier auch bei RU-vid hinterlegt) seit zwei Semestern -- der Vorteil ist, dass man kollaborativ Ressourcen für die akademische Ausbildung schaffen kann.
Anh Quân Nguyễn Thanks for watching! And this gives me a good excuse to point to Stephen Fry's "Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers": 2:18 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ij1pZvv9m0g.html
+Kevin Cruz Many thanks for watching, Kevin! My 'advanced' videos cover Construction Grammar (ru-vid.com/group/PLKgdsSsfw-fZyiK6ahhdg4N3n4NrpdgWk) and Cognitive Linguistics (ru-vid.com/group/PLKgdsSsfw-faeun9_0LVETPT-ZGpKptlj).
Good day. Wow, thanks so much. Hope you have a website where we can get social online with members to make some friends too. I want to get in touch socially with English speaking people, especially native speakers. Thanks Martin. Hope we can make some friends.
Danke Dir fürs Zuschauen! Ja, die Videos sind für meine geflippte Einführung in die anglistische Linguistik. Das erste Semester (11 Videos, bis einschliesslich Semantik) ist online und von meiner UniNe-Homepage aus verlinkt.
I like your presentation but could any lay person (non-linguist) disagree with six of the seven assumptions? (the brain bit doesn't seem to have any consequence other than to make linguistics sound 'Sciency'. The rest would be plausible to any 13 year old person in the world? So why study linguistics if we are blind-folded by the partisan approaches and are forced to invest in blind leaps of faith, following one of its branches like a religion or a cult, until we are too old to risk stepping out of the 'flow' . As an English teacher who has to 'dabble' in Applied Linguistics, (i.e. write papers that seem meaningless) just to stay employable, I wonder why? I note that the Polyglots' Conference last year promised, 'no theory' in their conference, such was their disdain for it.
Could any lay person disagree? Yes, they often do, even university students. Misconceptions die hard. Why study linguistics? Language is a sophisticated cultural tool. Understanding it better is foundational to just about any serious effort to understand what it means to be human.
Agree with the motive to study it, and any book with a title like, 'Intro to Linguistics' looks so promising. After a few years of skimming through these books and thinking about life as an English teacher or attempting to learn a foreign language where we still must* rely on terms of classical grammar, one can see how divergent linguistics has become. In fact the various approaches are so different in their fundamental assumptions (and still splintering), and their terms and formal descriptions/diagrams are completely incompatible with one another, one is left with the conclusion - We are still in the dark about language. Nobody seems to agree (or even attempt to reconcile this) they just forge ahead, 'Schooled in their school' (dependency, constituency, cognitive, context bound vs context free, connectionist etc.) and then they only talk among themselves. Language teachers and learners fend for themselves with a casual/classical/intuitive approach and a dose of salt. I mean language is fascinating, yes! But the way linguistics is marketed as a science is really dodgy IMO. (At least in so far as teachers are forced to study it in MA programs which they need, by the way, just to hold down an ELT job)
I see unity in diversity. Yes, different linguistic frameworks focus on different issues, but all of them are bona fide attempts to grapple with a very complex issues. You can take away insights from all of them.
Indeed, it is a noble effort and tensions and flaws in approaches have caused these parts to break away from one another. Cognitive linguistics for example. However, when one is drawing insights from various approaches, one is not studying science in a positive sense. I for one, love the constituent tree diagrams for the elegance (sans the loops at the bottom) but I do not agree with universal grammar or a biologcially determined underlayer or deep layer of grammar is so far as it pertains to language exclusively. Can I borrow the diagrams from one approach, and the philosophical assumptions of another? Sure, and I will have no paper to write. No journal to publish me and ultimately no salary as an English teacher. But if I 'sign up' with the Chomsky Army, or the 'Langgackers Corp' etc., I must stand by their rules or else. So that is why we teachers/learners really ignore most of 20th century/21st century linguistics in our daily working lives. It is also why we can't protect our jobs and are racked with insecurity because 'Anyone can teach language' and why, despite the irrelevance, paradoxically, our field is full of linguists of one tradition or another, or literature types who can safety by-pass the whole business. (They fight their own battles) Perhaps it is just endemic in all Social Sciences.
...and thus another potential conversation ends. On with busine$$. Yes, linguistics is a science! yes, "different frameworks focus on different issues", but there is no core - no fundamental truth, not yet.
Jar Jar Binks appeared in Ep. 1 and 2 (and perhaps 3, I'm not too sure), so the three Prequel episodes, which were released from 1999 onwards. Episode four was the very first Star Wars Movie that was released. People mix up the order all the time, just thought I'd share the correction. Though I should actually be studying right now... Great video though, thank you.
