A course in Cognitive Linguistics: Introduction
Вставка
- Опубліковано 3 гру 2024
- This is the first episode of a video series in which I present Cognitive Linguistics. What is cognitive linguistics? Is it a branch of psycholinguistics? Is it functional? About metaphor? Anti-Chomskyan? Find out for yourself!
I really appreciate your work, thank you so much for sharing your knowledge with us !
Thanks for watching!
I study english philology and systemic functional grammar is blowing my mind right now - I'm here to find out how far metafunctions can go. thank you for spreading the knowledge!
I'm from Brazil and I'm spending this quarantine period to decide if Im gonna apply for a masters in Anthropology or Cognitive linguistics. Your videos are helping me a lot, thanks
What did you decide, may I ask?
I'm trying to make a shift from ELT with a keen interest in linguistics towards cognitive linguistics as my chosen field of study... and this video just gave me a clear big picture of what I'll be dealing with in that area.
Thanks, Martin.
I can already tell that I'm going to absolutely love this series! I'm glad I came across it. Thank you for all your work on this.
I love your passion about linguistics. In fact, I love you. Thank you for all of your videos. UA-cam needs more people like you.
Thank you! Makes me happy to hear that.
Just began these videos as I'm starting work on metaphor in ELT. Thanks for sharing this!
Your explanation is great Sir . Well done , thanks
I am pursuing a Master's in Linguistics, I have Cognitive Linguistics as one of my mandatory courses. My midterm exams starts the day after tomorrow. Your series is gonna help me a lot. Thanks a lot.
Helpful for all my macro linguistic subjects at modern language studies of MA..4th semester stud.Thanks !
Arzu Khan you are nice
Thank you! It's very clear and well organized!
+Xiaoming Hou Thanks for watching!
I like the way you simplify and introduce the concept.
I'm really glad that I came across your channel. Thanks a lot!
Dear Martin! Thank you so much for this course - very informative, very interesting!
+Tina Kazakova Thanks for watching!
Hi Professor. I am a student researcher in Cognitive Linguistics and would be glad if you can provide me with your e-mail so I can keep in touch with you for the sake of giving me some kind of help with my research. Regards
Thank you for freely distributing this knowledge.
I consider both "reading" sentences to be grammatically correct in English. As a native speaker, they both sound right to me, they just have a significant difference in meaning.
Very helpful and clear, thank you! (From a philosophy undergraduate).
+Arun Baxter Thank you, Arun!
Thank, you Sir for your really beneficial videos
thank you for making straight up good content
Wonderful video! Very clear explanation! Congrats and thanks a lot for sharing your knowledge here!
Thank you for your work. It's really helpful for all who start to be interested in cognitive linguistic.
Amazing! I was looking for something that could help my students in their first contact with the theory. This is really hepful!
Thank you for this upload. It is very well explained.
Thanks, Andriy!
Very interesting. Thank you. The filing example. Before reading what? the rules for filing? or the report itself? Semantically ambiguous in its referential function to the world hence interactive communicative potential. Whatever way I could get in trouble with the boss. Lacking in cohesion if written. In both cases but in writing the functional does not strike as much as the formal.
Excellent ! , so clear
I really apreciate that! Tanx a lot! So well explained!!!
+odilon rosa Thanks for watching!
Your knowledge on congnitive Linguistics is deep . I want to do dessertation on congnitive Linguistics..Can you please suggest me any topic
Hello Sir, thanks for sharing. They're all so informative and helpful. 🌸🌸
This is gold...thanks for this
Thanks! so clear, informative and helpful!
Thank you so much for these videos!
thanks a lot for this! I'm taking language and cognition for my MA. really need this! again, thank you!
Thank you for these lectures, they are extremely helpful!
Thank you very much for these lectures! Are the slides available for download somewhere?
Your videos have already helped me to get ready for 2 important exams; thank you very much Martin!😊
Good luck with the exams!
This is great stuff. I think I'm going to have to rebrand myself a cognitive psycholinguist, because I start with CL but am very interested in processing in the brain and on computers. My system easily can detect the difference in grammaticality between _this is the report I filed before reading_ and _I filed the report before reading._ But never mind.
There's an argument against generative grammar in general I have not seen in the literature. If we require that it handle utterances of infinite length, as I think we must, then the set of all such utterances is uncountably infinite, that is, the cardinality is א1 or א2 depending on whether you like CH or not. Thus no process can enumerate them even with ω0 steps. Of course, grammaticality is not binary anyway and could not be to allow for diachronic changes in grammar, but it seems to me this is pretty obvious, and I wonder why I haven't seen it. Have you?
This is amazing, thank you!
Your videos truly help me! Thank you 🙏
Thanks for watching!
Very good tutorial. Thank you!
Great Job
The most amazing thing about the video is it has 0 dislikes.
It just hasn't been found by the Chomskyans... yet.
Now it has:((
Now it has:((
Thank you very much for this video.
My question is, I guess, if I say there is a language, where the equivalence expression of 'I filed the report before reading' / 'This is the report that I filed before reading it' is grammatical; then, should a good generativist come up with a new rule and add it up to their universal grammar first, or should they actually do some sort of field study to find an instance of such a language first? I guess that's why I prefer cognitive linguistics over the generative one, because the latter has a basal logic flaw: you can not claim there is a homo-sapiens universal grammar for all languages, no matter how deep it is embedded pyschologically; while devriving all evidences you need from extant languages. Extant languages only form up a very small subset of all languages, which also includes extinct, died languages and future yet-to-realise, yet-to-branch languages. That is to say, the generatists can claim that, given enough time, not all kinds of word-soup (that we construct from all the extant datas) well finally be adopted in one or another language since there must be a set of constraints, ergo there must be a universal grammar; but if that's the case, on what ground it is to proof the universal grammar's being truely universal? Why one can not say what the generativists think is universal is actually both phenomenologically and logically 'selected'?
Thanks from Egypt 🇪🇬🇪🇬🇪🇬😊🌹
thank you so much for explaining!
I think I know how to use a very short phrase to give people some idea of what the cognitive linguistics roughly is... It's a version of generative linguistics where all nouns are fundamentally considered as pronoun (and all verbs re-verbalized verbal nouns, maybe), the word 'book' means nothing more than a very limited and very specified version of 'it' that refers to something which is empirically and COGNITIVELY not a non-book (and if you do use it to refer a non-book, grammar is just a frame-work instrument, a formal premise, for those who know 'a book is a book' to know how to correct you)...And GENERATIVELY, I believe one can actually derive a somewhat rudimentary version of cognitive linguistics from the extant generative lingustics literature by adopting this variable...
Thank you for this intro
Impressive!
+Jeroen Claes Many thanks, Jeroen!
I've got a question I'll appreciate if u could answer🙇 My question is that whether trajectory/landmark are equal as figure/ground? ?
Yes. Trajectory/Landmark are Langacker's terms for the concepts that Figure/Ground express more generally.
@@MartinHilpert Great ! Thanks again 🌸
Thank you.
Thank you!
Sir, thanks for the video? I study metaphor. Do we run into the problem of reduction when using metaphor for something abstract?
Could you talk about cognitive stylistics please
Pretty sure war is a super violent argument. Never heard of a war where the participants were in perfect agreement and killed each other anyway.
¿Cuándo se publica el segundo episodio?
¡Mira! ua-cam.com/video/R0BYLpwSM6E/v-deo.html
Awesome
Can I study that kind of masters program with an undergrad in romance philology?
thank you for this
Hi Mr. Hilpert,
Is Intro to English Linguistics a prerequisite for this course? Or can I just start with this course on Cognitive Linguistics without knowing anything about Linguistics?
Thanks.
You should be able to follow without any prior knowledge of linguistics!
@@MartinHilpert Thank you. I'll give it try and see how far I can go.
Thank youuu
Can someone explain for non-native why is the second sentence is ungrammatical?
thanks king
Hello sir. First of all, I really love your videos, I have been watching them and taking down notes and ideas... I would like to ask you a couple of questions. look, I am currently thinking about carring out a research on cognitive linguistics. What I want to analyse are the cognitive differences that exist between native Spanish speakers and English native speakers when using prepositions. The real thing is that cognitive linguistics is a very new topic to me, and I do not know whether my idea is viable. Could you recommend me some books or authors that could help me to start off with my investigation?, and from your point of view, does my investigation have a possible and measurable finding? Thanks in advance ¡¡¡ I hope you can shed some light on my doubts ¡¡¡
There is a very useful book on cognitive linguistics, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching that may be of interest to you: books.google.co.uk/books?id=__ZGATNjvZoC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Hello Edward. I have just seen your comment and am interested to know more about your idea. What cognitive differences do you believe exist?
Stories are constructed by words. The universe is constructed by stories.
Although he seems earnest in his political activism, I don't listen to Chomsky when it comes to linguistics.
Postmodern age activism has a trend towards understanding the function of language to self-identity and world-concept.
It seems strange to me that Chomsky the activist doesn't see or mention an aspect of social-construction in the 'white people' identity, which is a significant study of civil-rights activism.
The sentence 'I filed the report before reading' is not ungrammatical, if reading is understood in the sense that requires no direct object.
I just rewatched this part and saw that you stipulated the understanding that what was being read was the report. It seems unusual for me to call a sentence that is valid English in some contexts ungrammatical, but as I reconsider this, it seems that cognitive processes would flag the said sentence as invalid within the context, and what we call 'ungrammatical' might be in need of extension to cover 'grammatical but invalid'.
Yes, sometimes we fill in the missing bits without even thinking about it. In my case i think i stuck 'it' on the end & it seemed ok. We do that sort of thing so much & never realise we do.
Like your Voice
Can u help me to find a source about this topic, i need it for me search graduate,plz
Thanks
Thank you for the great talk! Do you have any recommended books/papers that overview cognitive linguistics? Thank you!
The first chapter in this book:
books.google.ch/books?id=rsqwg-6N0Q4C&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Hello sir. Can I contact with you? It's urgent.
Isn't "I filed the report before reading" a grammatical sentence of English? How so? It seems everything IS in its right place in that sentence.
Hello Huss, many thanks for your comment. There is quite a bit of syntactic work that starts with the observation that sentences like these are not grammatical. If you google "parasitic gaps", you will find some useful references.
Thank you Martin for the reply. Appreciate it.
just saw this sentence (similar to the one in your video) here [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasitic_gap#cite_note-5] (which I assume the author - whoever s/he is - considers to be licensed despite the presence of a parasitic gap):
This essay is hard to understand __ without reading __p several times. (Parasitic gap present despite the lack of wh-fronting and topicalization)
Once you get to several levels of embedding like that, I'm afraid that my intuitions, which are a bit unreliable to begin with, start to fail completely. In the classic Engdahl 1983 paper, I think I agree maybe with half of the grammaticality judgments...
Interesting. To me, most of those sentences in the Wikipedia entry seem plausible - though of course I'm not a native speaker of English in the strictest sense of the word. Since they haven't been asterisked, I guess the author(s) find them grammatical (some start with single or double question marks, of course). I showed the sentence examples to two of my colleagues and they disagreed on the grammaticality issue as well. Seems like grammaticality judgments - like many other things - have to do with a person's psychology as well - how far they'd allow things - including grammatical variation - to happen without questioning ---(p) :D
you are s sweet and simple you are skilled
cani communicate with u professor ؟
hi professor i wonder what is your nationality
I was born in Germany, and I live in Switzerland.
@@MartinHilpert cool!!! cz u speak with an american accent and i thought ur from the us