Word formation processes 

2021. Still valuable. Thank you professor!

I have been taught that there are 12 word formation processes: 1) Coining 2) Adoption of Brand Names 3) Onomatopoeia 4) Borrowing 5) Affixation 6) Clipping 7) Blending 8) Reduplication 9) Acronyms 10) Backformation 11) Conversion 12) Compounding

You helped me understand this topic very easily during quarantine! Great job and thank you!

Thank you for the beautiful lecture .❤️

Thanks very much it was helpful and interesting.

it was very easy and informative lecture.

Very useful. Thanks a lot

+Martin Hilpert If one of the words you are blending begins with a vowel sound, how would the technique that you showed here change?

@ 31:37 You can't have 'goap' as a blend but there're no rules which says you can't have 'shoat'. So, you can either call it 'geep' or 'shoat' : )

thank you so much, it helped a lot)

Very useful thanx a lot 😊

This was so useful thank you! I wrote chickagator

Thank you mister

your videos are always useful for me thank you!

Nice explanation. Could you please help me. the explanation of the historical changes of productivity. Thank you.

I'm no linguist, but I would argue that things like "silk tie" and "aluminum foil" do not break the compound stress rule because they are not compounds at all. I would say that "silk tie" are two words where each performs a specific function. "Tie" is a noun which informs us of what we are talking about (a tie) and "silk" acts as an adjective here. It informs us of what type of tie we are referring to specifically. This may, however, just be a disagreement over the definition of what a word is. I would say that "Boston Marathon," though functioning as one unit to refer to a specific event, is actually made up of two words, where "marathon" tells us what we are talking about and "Boston" specifies which marathon we are referring to in particular. Anyway, nice videos. Keep up the great work.

Well done sir

So undesirability can be split up into: {un-} + {desire} + {-able} + {-ty}, right? Therefore: 1. {desire} + {-able} = denominal Adjectivecompound using Suffixation. 2. {desirable} + {-ty} = deadjectivial Nouncompund using Suffixation. 3. {un-} + {desirability} = Negation using Prefixiation. In sum, this compound is a negated nominal compound. Is that correct? Are there better ways to describe the individual processes of compounding?

Yes ,it is useful for us

Thank you so much for these highly structured video.I want to ask about how many types of conversion we have?

thx so much from Morocco

Thank you, I now understand this :) Apart from that, do you think the word 'thank you' is a compounding ?

Thank you so much ❤❤

6:40 Hello, I was searching about this kind of words for the chart and I can find them Can you help me with more examples for each one or maybe one way for find them on internet? Please it's for a work...

My centauric choice is "cockodile".

thanks a lot ,it is useful

Thank you;)

I think that jumping been is some kind of bean with a worm in it which makes it look like it's jumping when the worm is moving inside. At least that's what it was originally ;)

negative iN- also changes before 'r' (irregular') and 'l' (illegible).

Cool

In your lessons about morphological productive I didn't understand the meaning of words when you add suffixes on it .

how about the word "RU-vidr" can you make a short analyze about which term could describe?

A comment I'd like to make is that in "linguist" there are two syllables not three.../liŋg-wist/. (Please, correct me if I'm wrong, or if I've misunderstood your point somewhere). I do like your videos, warm greetings!

The wind blew and wind the clock. The two different wind here are conversion?

An observation: I understand that this is INTRODUCTION to linguistics, so therefore you do not go into greater detail when discussing these. However I still need to ask - are you familiar with the Cognitive Onomasiological Theory (Štekauer, 1996, 1998, 2001) ? It is a part of Word Formation realm and greatly explains not only Conversion (which is my main point here, as it is not simply "changing the word class of a word") but most (all) other Word Formation processes and makes it possible to group them together, without the need for the division between Compounding, Affixation, Blending etc.. The starting point is a semantic analysis of extralinguistic reality, rather than analysis of an actual word as seen in the Semasiological approach. Please bear in mind I am not an advanced student, rather a beginner, but already I can see the wide possible implications of this theory, where the main focus lies on the act of naming - and most importantly - the speaker/coiner himself. A word is not formed by itself, and human input plays a huge role - this concept is ignored by vast majority of mainstream linguists, which is a shame. Needless to say, all the other morphological, lexical and phonological processes and rules are still valid and applicable (and necessary of course). Still, thank you for all the videos on your channel - especially concerning morphology and word formation. Very helpful for all the beginners out there :)

it is useful ,,, God bless you

Hi I have question Biology is it infixtion

grating is confusing...seems as if it was derived from another class-word. like 'caring' is derived from the word 'care', by adding the DERIVATIONAL suffix 'ing' to the root 'care' What is the difference between them? why the 'grating 'has a INFLECTIONAL suffix and and 'caring' has a DERIVATIONAL suffix? (

29:02 chiguana

.....”alcoholics or rapists or what not” the way you casually throw that out as if that was the average born again Christian is hilarious 😂

Thank you sir i am from iraq in my book mophology is so hart can you halp me pleas ☺