I am impressed with the explanation! It was mindblowing! I read in a book that Old Turkic didn’t have functional category projection (FCP), while Modern Turkish developed it over a span of some time. Somehow I got to know that FCP is related to X-bar theory and that is how I found this excellent introductory video!
Helloooo I’m going to have linguistics exam this week, with Syntax and Parts of speech! Your videos are being really helpful! Thank you for explaining what my teacher didn’t explained well 🙂
Most of this is completely foreign to how I (also a linguist) and many others view language. I know its mentioned briefly in the video but I just thought I'd press the point again for viewers that (some form of) generative grammar is not the only approach to syntax.
Thanks a million,man!!! I couldn't have understood this without you. I really appreciate your time( and you). However ,when it comes to syntax tree.. It's just like climbing up Mount Everest. What's your advice?
Hello I am a freshman in high school and was recently introduce to the study of linguistics. When doing some further research I came across forensic linguistics and am interested in furthering my knowledge on the study. I watched your very first video covering the many different studies within linguistics. While listening I thought that syntax would be a field of study that would be helpful. Would I be correct on the assumption or should I be looking into a different part.
@@FingtamLanguages Fakte, mi havas proponon (aŭ eble defion!) por vi: ĉu vi kuraĝus fari prelegon pri lingvistiko dum NASK ĉi-somere? Mi scias, ke multaj taksus tion tre interesa (ja estas multaj lingvemuloj ĉe NASK!), kaj mi neniam aŭdis antaŭe tian prelegon en (kaj certe ne pri) Esperanto. Vi povus paroli pri lingvistiko ĝenerale kaj doni ekzemplojn en Esperanto: mi kredas, ke tio multe helpus homojn pli bone kompreni la enhavon de gramatikaj libroj, ekzemple. (Mi ĉiam legadas pri "adjunktoj" kaj "komplementoj", kaj viaj filmetoj finfine klarigis tiujn konceptojn al mi). Mi supozas, ke eble tio sonas iom timiga, sed mi ankaŭ scias, ke vi emas fari aferojn kiuj timigas vin, do... mi esperas, ke vi faros tion! :-D
Ho, kia honoro. Dankon por peti. Sed mi timas, ke mia Esperanto ne sufiĉas por fari prelegon Esperantan pri tiel kompleksa temo. Ĉu ĉiu prelego devas esti en Esperanto?
@@FingtamLanguages Mi ne scias, ĉu estas "reguloj" pri tio: sed prelegoj prefere ja estu en Esperanto, ĉar oni malemas al krokodilado dum NASK (sume: kial krokodili la solan semajnon en la tuta jaro, kiam oni estas en tut-Esperanta etoso, ĉu ne?). :-) Mi tamen malkonsentas kun vi, ke via Esperanto ne sufiĉas: vi simple devus lerni iom da fakaj vortoj pri lingvistiko, kio verŝajne estus interesa al vi ĉiaokaze, kiel lingvisto! :-) Kaj se vi volas plibonigi vian paroladon, restas multe da tempo antaŭ NASK: vi povus aliĝi al programo Ekparolu!, ekzemple, kaj ekzerci vin tiele, se vi volas. Nu, mi ne volas "premi" vin, sed mi ja kuraĝas vin fari ĉi tion: mi certas, ke mi kaj la aliaj partoprenantoj ĝuos ĝin. :-)
Hi, thanks for the reply! I did a video about some phonological processes earlier in the series. I probably won't touch on phonotactics for a while, but it's definitely something I would love to get to eventually.
In English adjectives come before the name because some day a long time ago somebody had decided that and since everybody has followed this rule. It doesn't explain why "impossible" comes after. Ie mission impossible. And of course adjectives separated by be come after the name. A yellow bird. The bird is yellow.
missiong impossible might seem incorrect but it makes sense when it is considered a noun phrase. However, saying "the missiong impossible" is simply not correct.
I wonder. If we put some people on an isolated isle where they hear, listen to and practise sentences or phrases for a long time. Dog bones like, I watch a not do have. I suppose after a while these sentences will stay in the subconscious as "correct and natural" sentences, or not.
![Syntax III: Linguistics 101 [Video 7]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/E98uyYEXZ00/mqdefault.jpg)
![Syntax III: Linguistics 101 [Video 7]](/img/tr.png)
![[Syntax] X-Bar Theory - Specifiers, Adjuncts, and Complements](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n8TYuq173N0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Semantics: Intro to Linguistics [video 8]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ycWDuU5eYv0/mqdefault.jpg)
![Syntax IV: Linguistics 101 [Video 8]](/img/n.gif)
I only came here to pass linguistics at uni but now i'm actually interested in the subject. Keep up the good work^^
same here.
I have literally not understood anything from my readings until I stumbled across your videos. Thank you so, so much! You're a great help!
So glad my videos are helpful! Thanks for sharing 😊
You can't imagine how much you've helped me!!!
FINALLY!!! ENLIGHTENMENT!!!!
So glad my videos can be helpful! :)
I am impressed with the explanation! It was mindblowing! I read in a book that Old Turkic didn’t have functional category projection (FCP), while Modern Turkish developed it over a span of some time. Somehow I got to know that FCP is related to X-bar theory and that is how I found this excellent introductory video!
Syntax is definitely complicated but I can enjoy learn it by watching your videos. Thank you, sir.
Helloooo I’m going to have linguistics exam this week, with Syntax and Parts of speech! Your videos are being really helpful! Thank you for explaining what my teacher didn’t explained well 🙂
Your teaching method is very extraordinary and attractive for the learner's.
thank you very much for your instruccion, it's helped me a lot. Hope you don't stop doing in them
Thanks! I do plan on creating more in the future!
Thanks from Turkey bro your videos gonna be useful in my exams keep up the good work :D
Thanks for the video and book recommendation ☺
Most of this is completely foreign to how I (also a linguist) and many others view language. I know its mentioned briefly in the video but I just thought I'd press the point again for viewers that (some form of) generative grammar is not the only approach to syntax.
THANK YOU for this amazing explanation 🥰
thank you so much .
Mil gracias por tus vídeos. Empiezo a amar la lingüística gracias a ti
Gracias our tu comentario! :)
Very informative. As a beginner I learned a lot.
Thank you.
absolutely love this video! Thanks a lot!
Studying syntax
Man i was lost
Thanks man really appreciate
Saying hello from Libya
POR FIN REGRESO! Creo que voy a ver este video mañana porque ahorita los ojitos los tengo casi cerrados. ❤
Thank you Sir
Hi! Is there any chance you can also do a video on pragmatics? Would be so awesome! Your videos have helped me so much! Greetings from Germany!
I love your content. Well Done!
Thanks a million,man!!!
I couldn't have understood this without you. I really appreciate your time( and you).
However ,when it comes to syntax tree..
It's just like climbing up Mount Everest.
What's your advice?
looking forward to the other videos ❤
Thank you sir
This video is very useful for me🙏
Hello I am a freshman in high school and was recently introduce to the study of linguistics. When doing some further research I came across forensic linguistics and am interested in furthering my knowledge on the study. I watched your very first video covering the many different studies within linguistics. While listening I thought that syntax would be a field of study that would be helpful. Would I be correct on the assumption or should I be looking into a different part.
Tre interese! Mi feliĉas, ke vi finfine revenis al ĉi tiu serio. Nepre daŭrigu ĝin! 😃
Dankon 😊
@@FingtamLanguages Fakte, mi havas proponon (aŭ eble defion!) por vi: ĉu vi kuraĝus fari prelegon pri lingvistiko dum NASK ĉi-somere? Mi scias, ke multaj taksus tion tre interesa (ja estas multaj lingvemuloj ĉe NASK!), kaj mi neniam aŭdis antaŭe tian prelegon en (kaj certe ne pri) Esperanto. Vi povus paroli pri lingvistiko ĝenerale kaj doni ekzemplojn en Esperanto: mi kredas, ke tio multe helpus homojn pli bone kompreni la enhavon de gramatikaj libroj, ekzemple. (Mi ĉiam legadas pri "adjunktoj" kaj "komplementoj", kaj viaj filmetoj finfine klarigis tiujn konceptojn al mi).
Mi supozas, ke eble tio sonas iom timiga, sed mi ankaŭ scias, ke vi emas fari aferojn kiuj timigas vin, do... mi esperas, ke vi faros tion! :-D
Ho, kia honoro. Dankon por peti. Sed mi timas, ke mia Esperanto ne sufiĉas por fari prelegon Esperantan pri tiel kompleksa temo. Ĉu ĉiu prelego devas esti en Esperanto?
@@FingtamLanguages Mi ne scias, ĉu estas "reguloj" pri tio: sed prelegoj prefere ja estu en Esperanto, ĉar oni malemas al krokodilado dum NASK (sume: kial krokodili la solan semajnon en la tuta jaro, kiam oni estas en tut-Esperanta etoso, ĉu ne?). :-)
Mi tamen malkonsentas kun vi, ke via Esperanto ne sufiĉas: vi simple devus lerni iom da fakaj vortoj pri lingvistiko, kio verŝajne estus interesa al vi ĉiaokaze, kiel lingvisto! :-) Kaj se vi volas plibonigi vian paroladon, restas multe da tempo antaŭ NASK: vi povus aliĝi al programo Ekparolu!, ekzemple, kaj ekzerci vin tiele, se vi volas.
Nu, mi ne volas "premi" vin, sed mi ja kuraĝas vin fari ĉi tion: mi certas, ke mi kaj la aliaj partoprenantoj ĝuos ĝin. :-)
Okay, mi devas pensi pri tio. Mi tre sxatas defiojn, sed mi me volas malbone fari prelegon.
No dislikes. You deserve it! :)
Haha, I mean you are so good. First time I see a video without a dislike in UA-cam :D
Thank you! Haha I have plenty of dislikes, but no big deal!
2 random people: "hurr durr my brain too smol to understand dis so dislike"
Thanks from morocco
Thanks!
So, Must we be good at English grammar in order to recognize which one is an adjunct or a complement, right?
What are the motivating factors for the x-bar theory of phrase structure?!
Could you please explain the difference between ... psg..ICA...x bar
hi can we please get videos on phonotactic constraints and the phonological process please and thanks, your videos are great
Hi, thanks for the reply! I did a video about some phonological processes earlier in the series. I probably won't touch on phonotactics for a while, but it's definitely something I would love to get to eventually.
What are the 6 diagram tests of syntax please?
In English adjectives come before the name because some day a long time ago somebody had decided that and since everybody has followed this rule. It doesn't explain why "impossible" comes after. Ie mission impossible. And of course adjectives separated by be come after the name. A yellow bird. The bird is yellow.
missiong impossible might seem incorrect but it makes sense when it is considered a noun phrase. However, saying "the missiong impossible" is simply not correct.
I wonder. If we put some people on an isolated isle where they hear, listen to and practise sentences or phrases for a long time. Dog bones like, I watch a not do have. I suppose after a while these sentences will stay in the subconscious as "correct and natural" sentences, or not.
Actually I need a lesson about phonology exactly analysis of the data and morphophonemics data please and thank you
I'm having a hard time separating phrases and creating their separate branches of the tree huhu
You could have called PPs “prephs”... I think it would have worked well.
HAHA yeah, but to be consistent, I just called them PP's. Also, I think it's funny!
make simple for us because we are unable to understand clearly