Thank you so much for these short lessons! Great for people who didn't get a chance to study the subject in college...(however, since when are bats birds?! And yes, penguins have specialized feathers.)
Regarding the classical theory, if some elements belonging to a word-set do not validate each given characteristic it doesn't mean that using characteristics is a bad way of defining a word, it simply means that the characteristics were not chosen wisely in the first place. In your example, "able to fly" should never have been a characteristic for bird in the first place. Moreover, in the prototypes theory, what determines wether an element is closely or loosely related to an exemplar are still characteristics/conditions. Thus, the Prototypes theory doesn't solve a problem, it just blends it into some rigor-lacking ideas. Also bats are most defenitely not birds.
Dear Sir As you have said there are problems in the prototype theory regarding the inclusion of penguin into a 'bird category' or 'animals that swim', how can that theory solve the problem of fuzziness and asymmetry? I would be highly privileged if you give me an answer. Regards Saji Krishna Pillai
Thank you so much professor. Actually, I'm working on professor Eleanor Rosch theory of "Categorization", and I would like you, please, to give me some suggestions about narrowed topics related to this theory to work on them in my Master thesis. Thank you.
Your teaching is wonderfully clear and logical!!! Thank you so much!! I️ wish more Professors taught in such a logical manner!!
The way you explain the previous lecture and the whole terms at the end is fantastic! It reminds us to all.
السلام عليكم : دكتور جهودك مشكورة ، متابع لك من الموصل / العراق .
Thank you so much for these short lessons! Great for people who didn't get a chance to study the subject in college...(however, since when are bats birds?! And yes, penguins have specialized feathers.)
Regarding the classical theory, if some elements belonging to a word-set do not validate each given characteristic it doesn't mean that using characteristics is a bad way of defining a word, it simply means that the characteristics were not chosen wisely in the first place. In your example, "able to fly" should never have been a characteristic for bird in the first place. Moreover, in the prototypes theory, what determines wether an element is closely or loosely related to an exemplar are still characteristics/conditions. Thus, the Prototypes theory doesn't solve a problem, it just blends it into some rigor-lacking ideas. Also bats are most defenitely not birds.
جزاكم الله خيرا دكتور
Million thanks for this useful and great lecture
دكتور شكرا لجهودك انا كتير استفدت بأسلوبك الرائع
Great lecture! I wonder, how can the prototype theory be applied to a list of conditions, like the situation with the concept of Gold?
Dear Sir
As you have said there are problems in the prototype theory regarding the inclusion of penguin into a 'bird category' or 'animals that swim', how can that theory solve the problem of fuzziness and asymmetry?
I would be highly privileged if you give me an answer.
Regards
Saji Krishna Pillai
I just understood these concepts by your lectures. I want you to keep on uploading lectures.
It’s 2020 and I’m learning semantics on my free time. Help. Great video though ❤️
Wonderfully clear explanation. Thank you very much
Thank you so much professor. Actually, I'm working on professor Eleanor Rosch theory of "Categorization", and I would like you, please, to give me some suggestions about narrowed topics related to this theory to work on them in my Master thesis. Thank you.
bravo doctor you are a good explainner
Could you make E lectures on modern phonological theories: Optimality theory, please?
bats arent birds???
Thanks a lot 🌹
FYI bats are mammals
A bat
Is mammal ☹️
😉 good I get it 👍