I'm an MA student of applied linguistics and your videos are helping me more than I can ever say. No words can express my gratitude for your videos. You're a hero.
duuuude! this was so fun! I was dreading watching this video since I really didn't understand what morphological analysis really was, and now? I seem to be more interested in this than I initially thought! Kudos!
Finally, I can answer the exercise. Thank you Prof. Tomorrow I will get midterm of Introduction to Linguistics and I found this video, it helps me a lot to understand about morphology.
Thank you so much for the simplicity expressed in this series of yours from parts 1 - 3. I was able to comprehend at a faster rate and I'm sure this will get to stick more compared to reading from textbooks and lecture rooms. However, I have a few questions to ask in which I would be glad if I receive simplicity in explanations. 1. What are morphs? 2. Differences between morph and morpheme with instances or examples 3. 'All prefixes in English are derivational morphemes, but not all derivational morphemes in English are prefixes' can you please explain more on this, with examples Thank you once again, sir, await your speed answer.
1 and 2. A "morph" is the realization of a morpheme, so when someone actually produces a morpheme (in speech or writing), it ceases to be abstract and becomes a real thing (for example, saying "cheese" rather than thinking of the word/morpheme "cheese". Further, when discussing one "morph" in relation to other morphs, they can be thought of as allomorphs (the "s" is the not the same sound in "cats" and "dogs"--[s] vs. [z]; so those sounds are allomorphs of the "plural" morpheme in English. The relationship between a morph, allomorph, and morpheme is analogous to the relationship between a phone, allophone, and phoneme. 3. Any prefix in English is, by definition, derivational (because of what derivational morphemes are and how they behave). So, every single prefix in English is derivational (because they create new lexical entries and can change the lexical category of the stem to which they attach; e.g., "preview" and "view" are considered two different words in English). However, derivational morphemes do not have to be prefixes in English. For example, the "-al" suffix in English is derivational, even though it is a suffix because it distinguishes "nation" from "national" and we know it is derivational also because "nation" is a noun and "national" is an adjective, so the suffix changed the lexical category of the stem "nation". I hope that helps!
Thank you for your videos! I had a question about the underlying form of allomorphs: if an affix has multiple allomorphs and they are present in a data set, how do we know what the underlying form is? And how do we explain their phonetic distributions?
Hello! Generally, linguists would propose that the allomorph with the broadest distribution represents the "morpheme", and the "allomorphs" are any of the phonetic realizations of that morpheme, most often determined through phonological context. For example, consider the /ɪn/ morpheme (which means "not", as in "incomplete"). That morpheme, as an abstract mental representation, can be phonetically realized in several different ways, such as [ɪn] (as in [ɪnəbɪləɾi] "inability"), [ɪm] (as in [ɪmprɑpɹ̩] "improper"), or [ɪŋ] (as in [ɪŋkəmplit] "incomplete"). Note that [ɪm] appears when preceding bilabial stops and [ɪŋ] appears when preceding nasal sounds, so that consonant in the prefix "in-" assimilates with the place of articulation of the following sound (hence the allomorphs for this morpheme are phonologically determined). Given that, I would argue that /ɪn/ is the morpheme because [ɪn] appears in more widely varied phonological contexts than [ɪm] or [ɪŋ]. I hope that helps!
I would be grateful to you if you could do a video on Distributed Morphology and its use as a theoritical framework in applied linguistics research relating to word-formation and affixation. Many thanks in advance for taking my request into uour account.
Sir, i just saw your video. Thank you so much for your informative video. But i just have a doubt in it. You have mention in the Michoacan Aztec language [i], [mo] and [no] corresponds to 'his', 'your' and 'my' respectively. But in the data given, we could see [ik], [mok] and [nok] common to both the sets. In such case, how to identify and correspond the morphemes?
Hello! Thanks for your question. Based on this very limited data set, if one were to propose that [ik], [mok] and [nok] correspond to 'his', 'your' and 'my', respectively, one would expect to see, for example, [nokpelo], [mokpelo], and [mokpelomes] for "my dog", "your dog", and "your dogs" respectively. Now, it is possible that [no], for example, is the allomorph used when the following sound is a vowel (as in a. through d.) and the allomoph "nok" is used elsewhere but we don't really have enough data to confirm that. Therefore, I would propose it is best to go with the simpler solution (that [i], [mo] and [no] correspond to 'his', 'your' and 'my' respectively). I hope that helps!
![Morphology: Intro to Linguistics [video 4]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/oqO3zKxSeGE/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm an MA student of applied linguistics and your videos are helping me more than I can ever say. No words can express my gratitude for your videos. You're a hero.
Professor, please post more videos, i would like to learn everything about linguistics....
Most awesome videos for linguistics.. now I've no need to read my book . I've my final exam tomorrow..it helped me more than a lot
duuuude! this was so fun! I was dreading watching this video since I really didn't understand what morphological analysis really was, and now? I seem to be more interested in this than I initially thought! Kudos!
Thank you so much for much sir for your existence 🙏you have helped me learning morphology without getting cofused👍infinity love from India 🇮🇳 sir
Many thanks professor, this video was interesting and useful,i appreciate your efforts ❤.
Finally, I can answer the exercise. Thank you Prof. Tomorrow I will get midterm of Introduction to Linguistics and I found this video, it helps me a lot to understand about morphology.
Professor, thank you so much for this informative videos. Please teach us everything about linguistics, thanks to you i love this lecture anymore..
I really enjoy thanks a lot❤
Fantastic exercise. It's really a very nice video to understand the concept.
Thanks alot Prof. Your series of Linguistic videos are really helpful. You simplified concepts I have been battling with for months 🙏
Much love from India. Sir, please continue uploading videos frequently.🙏
I love your video videos sir. They are very helpful.
Great lecture.....Very helpful thankyou Sir
Thank you so much for this class, it helps me a lot on my CSET which is coming soon...
Watching from Nairobi, Kenya!Your videos are so informative. Thank you.
Thank you professor 👨🏫 i enjoyed learning this exercise
omg this is a hidden gem! thank you for sharing this it would be a big help especially in my course
Solved this in two minutes. I have no background in linguistics except i speak Russian, Tatar, and English.
You're AMAZING! ❤
Really Good❤️
Do you have more morphology analysis video - such as for morphs and allomorphs. ( This one was excellent as usual.)
It was great.. thank you so much ❤️🌹
Thank you, this exercise helped me so much ✨🌹
Professor please post a video on morphological analysis and stylistic analysis
We are waiting for more videos
Professor, please teach us more about linguistics. I am really willing to learn more of it because I am an English major. Thank you so much.
thanks a bunch . please post more videos about the interface btw morphology & phonology
Thank you so much for the simplicity expressed in this series of yours from parts 1 - 3. I was able to comprehend at a faster rate and I'm sure this will get to stick more compared to reading from textbooks and lecture rooms. However, I have a few questions to ask in which I would be glad if I receive simplicity in explanations.
1. What are morphs?
2. Differences between morph and morpheme with instances or examples
3. 'All prefixes in English are derivational morphemes, but not all derivational morphemes in English are prefixes' can you please explain more on this, with examples
Thank you once again, sir, await your speed answer.
1 and 2. A "morph" is the realization of a morpheme, so when someone actually produces a morpheme (in speech or writing), it ceases to be abstract and becomes a real thing (for example, saying "cheese" rather than thinking of the word/morpheme "cheese". Further, when discussing one "morph" in relation to other morphs, they can be thought of as allomorphs (the "s" is the not the same sound in "cats" and "dogs"--[s] vs. [z]; so those sounds are allomorphs of the "plural" morpheme in English. The relationship between a morph, allomorph, and morpheme is analogous to the relationship between a phone, allophone, and phoneme.
3. Any prefix in English is, by definition, derivational (because of what derivational morphemes are and how they behave). So, every single prefix in English is derivational (because they create new lexical entries and can change the lexical category of the stem to which they attach; e.g., "preview" and "view" are considered two different words in English). However, derivational morphemes do not have to be prefixes in English. For example, the "-al" suffix in English is derivational, even though it is a suffix because it distinguishes "nation" from "national" and we know it is derivational also because "nation" is a noun and "national" is an adjective, so the suffix changed the lexical category of the stem "nation". I hope that helps!
great. Thank you sir
Really Amazing! Thank you❤
Nice worksheet. Thanks!
Your videos are really helpful Sir. Thanks a lot. ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
SUPER HELPFUL!!!
Thank you for your videos! I had a question about the underlying form of allomorphs: if an affix has multiple allomorphs and they are present in a data set, how do we know what the underlying form is? And how do we explain their phonetic distributions?
Hello! Generally, linguists would propose that the allomorph with the broadest distribution represents the "morpheme", and the "allomorphs" are any of the phonetic realizations of that morpheme, most often determined through phonological context. For example, consider the /ɪn/ morpheme (which means "not", as in "incomplete"). That morpheme, as an abstract mental representation, can be phonetically realized in several different ways, such as [ɪn] (as in [ɪnəbɪləɾi] "inability"), [ɪm] (as in [ɪmprɑpɹ̩] "improper"), or [ɪŋ] (as in [ɪŋkəmplit] "incomplete"). Note that [ɪm] appears when preceding bilabial stops and [ɪŋ] appears when preceding nasal sounds, so that consonant in the prefix "in-" assimilates with the place of articulation of the following sound (hence the allomorphs for this morpheme are phonologically determined). Given that, I would argue that /ɪn/ is the morpheme because [ɪn] appears in more widely varied phonological contexts than [ɪm] or [ɪŋ]. I hope that helps!
Thank you so much prof❤ pliz could you share with us more exercises
I would be grateful to you if you could do a video on Distributed Morphology and its use as a theoritical framework in applied linguistics research relating to word-formation and affixation. Many thanks in advance for taking my request into uour account.
thank you!
Sir, i just saw your video. Thank you so much for your informative video. But i just have a doubt in it. You have mention in the Michoacan Aztec language [i], [mo] and [no] corresponds to 'his', 'your' and 'my' respectively. But in the data given, we could see [ik], [mok] and [nok] common to both the sets. In such case, how to identify and correspond the morphemes?
Hello! Thanks for your question. Based on this very limited data set, if one were to propose that [ik], [mok] and [nok] correspond to 'his', 'your' and 'my', respectively, one would expect to see, for example, [nokpelo], [mokpelo], and [mokpelomes] for "my dog", "your dog", and "your dogs" respectively. Now, it is possible that [no], for example, is the allomorph used when the following sound is a vowel (as in a. through d.) and the allomoph "nok" is used elsewhere but we don't really have enough data to confirm that. Therefore, I would propose it is best to go with the simpler solution (that [i], [mo] and [no] correspond to 'his', 'your' and 'my' respectively). I hope that helps!
@@evanashworth490 thanks you so much sir. it makes sense now. Make more videos, its really helpful.
Sir plz make video on Psycho linguistics.
Thank you so mush 🤗😀
After 2 minutes I found the correct answer by myself.
Thank you so much ❤❤❤
Awa la kwee
i dont khnow how t memorize the lessons of linguistics bcoz this is the my first time that i study linguistics
That's okay! Keep going! :)
hi sir ...thank you a lot for your efforts ... i wish you to do phonology video because i cant understand it ...
Unfortunately, the only phonology video I have right now is the a discussion of the difference between phonemes and allophones
explain about word formation process, please.
thx man
Wonderful presentation.
How can I reach you Sir?
You can reach me here or on Linkedin (Evan Ashworth)
Please Which source you have taken this example ?
I'm not sure, but this likely came from a version of Language Files.
Sorry , I want to understand the relation between morphology and this worksheet 🥺
Hi Nadia. This worksheet is just practice with identifying morphemes/pattern recognition, so it is part of a very general introduction to morphology.
The video isn't very clear. The words are not visible enough for me to read and follow the teaching.
Writing is too small for me
thank you💞💞💗💗💗💗💗💞💞💞
Thank you so much ❤