Introduction to Linguistics: The Complete Crash Course

[@Trevtutor]

This course was made mostly from O'Grady and Archibald's Contemporary Linguistic Analysis textbook. For the syntax section, I used different materials. Some introductory courses will use X-Bar theory for syntax; if that is you, I have a complete course on syntax that covers it on the channel. I prefer "baby" syntax for an introductory course because we get to talk about adjuncts, while most intro books that use X-Bar theory only cover specifiers and complements. There may be small errors as this was done in one take. I've noted one in the description of the video, but feel free to leave any errata in the comments below. Some facts in the introductory textbook may be wrong, and I may be repeating those mistakes. Enlighten me!

[@trimansinghtuteja4199]

A proper beginner course on linguistics! Literally what i have been searching to start to pursue it formally! Count me in!

[@Alanalan12297]

Wow, just wow! Please, if you can, upload a new course for more advanced topics! Thank you so much!

[@Trevtutor]

Working on a full morphology course atm. I will probably get into more niche topics once the pillars of undergraduate content is out.

[@deathmeter7243]

Even though I don't need phonology right now, I'm definitly going to come back to it every now and then.

[@habiburrehman7108]

Love from Pakistan. I have searched for an hour on KZbin and finally, I found this video. Amazing and helpful content. 🎉🎉

[@hiyaanjalivenkatesh1803]

english words arent enough to thank you! Your videos are amazingg👏👏

[@Trevtutor]

Thank you! 😃

[@sumeranoor6]

Thank you so much for uploading this very great wonderful and the most needed course ❤

[@hyeoniekim8927]

Thank you so much from South Korea

[@era6519]

I edge to your rizzy videos, gyattly appreciated

[@deathmeter7243]

Thank you for such a create video! I'm learning Lingustics so I can create my own language. I'm thinking about making a soley text-based language. Mainly because the only reason I'm making the language is for the sake of encrypting my writing.

[@IlyasKhan-qv2fk]

Which of the following constitutes a symmetrical relationship? A. Antonymy B. Complementary pairs C. Gradable pairs D. Relational pairs which option is correct?

[@Trevtutor]

It's kind of a vague question. A and D could both work. Antonyms are both opposites of each other. That oppositeness is symmetrical. Relational pairs include antonyms, so it could be argued it's symmetrical.

[@ElitePowerGamer]

Wow this is great! Last time I checked it was actually surprisingly hard to find a full Intro to Linguistics course online. Given that this is "only" 5 hours, how condensed would you say your video is compared to when it is taught in a university?

[@Trevtutor]

It's denser than a typical university course, but it covers the same material. It's the same material I taught when I taught it at a uni. Some intro courses might include language acquisition or processing, but those are not included here. EDIT: I don't think anyone can fully learn anything from a KZbin video, but the information here should be enough to complete exercises in introductory textbooks.

[@Alanalan12297]

"Hey, @Trevtutor, what exactly do you mean by 'fully learn'?"

[@Trevtutor]

Maybe 'master' is a better term. It's hard to give a single problem ('exploration' or 'critical thinking' in a completely new scenario) that takes 30+ min without skipping straight to a solution in video format. Listening to an explanation of a complex problem is nowhere near as beneficial as going through it and struggling with it on your own. It's hard to say that material is 'mastered' or 'fully learned' without being able to successfully demonstrate that ability.

[@kawtaroulahcen8770]

Great ♥️

[@hyeoniekim8927]

감사합니다. Thank you

[@yasinbadem366]

awesome! 🙏

[@katanoisshkiTRV]

SUPER SUPER SUPER GRAZIE!

[@actualgetawaycar]

50:10 Greek /ps/ was a cluster rather than a true affricate. Heterorganic affricates are incredibly rare, and, as far as I know, the only European language to have one is modern standard German with /p͡f/

[@user-kx8jn9gj6y]

can't we get pdf of this class ppt ?

[@dianalearning]

masterpiece

[@alypolyglot]

lit my brother 🔥

[@user-kx8jn9gj6y]

Respect from India bro best explanation 🫡😊

[@SfindIrshAp]

4:03 what about ubykh or moloko

[@lai6729]

Skibidi rizz💀💀💀💀

[@kookie2602]

Great❤

[@bigbangtheorymanic]

I’m confused about the difference the schwa makes, what’s the pronunciation difference between sæmn and with the schwa

[@Trevtutor]

www.internationalphoneticalphabet.org/ipa-sounds/ipa-chart-with-sounds/ You can listen to each individual vowel sound here. Sometimes it's hard to notice in fast speech. But, both those vowels differ in backness and height.

[@larala19]

I’m looking at the transcription of the six word at 1:08 and I’m having a hard time distinguishing the difference in the beginning of Jupiter and Cheese. To me they sound so similar and I don’t know why chesse is ʧ and Jupiter ʤ. Can anyone explain? Thank you ✨

[@holtonmody5725]

the "J" is voiced, while the "ch" is not, meaning you wouldn't need your vocal chords for the latter

[@muzdolabi]

33:01 I CAN'T MY BOTTOM LIP DOESN'T TOUCH MY TOP TEETH I AM GONNA CRY WHAT IS WRONG

[@andrewkonopik]

@Trevtutor love this video. Thank you. Are you a Canadian?

[@Trevtutor]

Ya eh

[@andrewkonopik]

@@Trevtutor greetings from Seattle. And btw it's pronounced "zee" hahaha jkjk 🤣😂

[@nehiraslan9691]

Skibidi rizz

[@Trevtutor]

ribidi skizz

[@Anonname-vb1ns]

Klackabodiliboop

[@JessenelleMontañez]

Skibidi rizz ohio

[@Alanalan12297]

Hi there, I have a question regarding language complexity. Is it possible for some languages to be more complex than others in every way possible (syntax, morphology, and semantics)? It seems to me that this is possible, for example, if we add the suffix "y" to the end of nouns to indicate the female gender of the noun, then we have updated English to be more complex, thus a language more complex than another one, I don't see how this will decrease the complexity in any other aspect. It seems to me that there is a threshold or a minimum amount of factors that have to be involved to create a full language, but anything above that point is extra complexity, so to speak. For example, why do we have the suffix "ed" at the end of "played" in "I played football yesterday"? There is no need for the "ed" since we have "yesterday" in the same sentence, right?

[@Trevtutor]

There are some differences in what complexity means to linguists and what complexity means in general. If we added a new inflectional morpheme for gender, that doesn't necessarily add complexity. We already have derivational suffixes for gender in some cases, "-ess", and "-ette-". But, one inflection isn't going to increase 'complexity' by any substantial amount. Syntax can be described across all language using context-sensitive grammar. So can phonology. All languages have redundancy. "la bonita" vs "el bonito" in Spanish has double-markings of gender. All forms of agreement are inherently redundant. Even in English, why specify the plural twice in "these dogs"? Why not just say "these dog" or "this dogs"?

[@Alanalan12297]

@@Trevtutor , that makes sense, so I simply misunderstood what complexity means. Does this then mean that adding "y" also would be considered a form of redundancy? Or does it add some complexity at all? Because if it does, then I could say how about we add more suffixes to add even more complexity, like "ta" for honorific use and so on. I mean, one must admit that there are new information being added to the sentence so does this mean more complexity or simply something else? And one last question, please, in Arabic, there are a lot of ways to express plural (about 50). Does this mean that if we reduce all of them in Arabic to just a few, we change the complexity of the language, or did we change something else?