Live from Chicago, Illinois. It's theCUBE, covering Veeamon 2018. Brought to you by Veeam. We're back in Chicago, Veeamon 2018. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. We go out to the events, we extract the signal from the noise. My name is Dave Vellante, and I'm here with my co-host Stu Miniman, day one of our two day coverage of Veeamon, our second year. Von Stewart is here, he's the vice president of technology at Pure Storage. Cube alum, good friend. Great to see you, man. Thank you, Dave, Stu. Thanks so much for coming on. It's great to be back. So Pure, I remember when you joined Pure, and you're like, Dave, this is going to be the rocket ship of a lifetime. It's turned out to be the case, first company since NetApp to hit a billion dollars in the storage business. It's like independent storage companies are back. Yeah. So give us the update, what's happening at Pure? So, fantastic year, wrapped up in the January, right? So, first independent storage company hit a billion dollars. Actually, we're kind of on the cusp of maybe being the fastest infrastructure company, if not the fastest tied with being the fastest to hit a billion dollars. So the growth rate's been great. The products obviously have been off the charts, whether you're looking at, from an analyst perspective, we know the Gardner reports, the IDC market scape. So if you look at, from the customer's perspective, with the NPS scores, right? Just crushing in terms of the products, the customers stating that we're not overstating the capabilities, and we make some pretty bold statements. But when you kind of bowl it back to where are we at now? I think our focus is helping customers adopt a data-centric architecture as a part of their IT or data center modernization plans, right? This is, we've kind of gone through this phase of like virtualize everything, now everything to the cloud, and now we're starting to mature a little bit, and we're all looking at this tsunami of data that's being created, and it's more around, where's your data going to reside? Because there's going to be some gravity around it, and bring the compute to where the data should reside. And so our products and our strategies to help customers, again, this data-centric architecture, adopt new technologies that are going to help them radically shift how they operate, changing the cost of operations, changing the complexity to either let an existing storage team scale to a larger capacity per full-time, you know, FTE, or to allow actually the application teams to private cloud teams just manage their infrastructure stack, right? We're seeing kind of growth in both areas. I think beyond that, our technology with our evergreen storage as a subscription model has also been able to be transformative for enterprise about how do they acquire, refresh, and introduce new technologies within the storage space, and so it's been pretty exciting. So let's talk about some of that. I remember I've been around a long time, Stu, as you know, so Al Shugart, the legend, once told me when I was just a pup, trying to understand the business. He said, Dave, the storage business is simple. Customers want it to be dirt-cheap, rock-solid, and lightning-fast. This is the days of spinning disk, which were kind of dirt-cheap, and they really weren't that rock-solid, and they really weren't that lightning-fast. So you guys actually delivered on that promise, but you added some other things. Simplicity, the business model of reduced friction, you mentioned evergreen. So it's not, obviously, not just about flash. Everybody said, oh, flash, Pure Storage Flash, we have flash too. It's so much more than that, the way you positioned it just now, the company, in terms of data centricity. And as I say, the business model innovations have really worked well for you. You've been able to stay ahead of the competition. I wonder if you could comment. Sure. So for your audience, I think it's important to maybe back up a bit. Pure was born in the wave of a number of all flash arrays. Yeah. And a fair amount of them were acquired by large existing storage vendors. And I think now that the dust has settled a bit, we were kind of the Phoenix that rose through those ashes, if you will, within the storage space. And I think really the key driver there was, it wasn't about performance. Flash makes everything faster. It was about a combination of the business model, the operational simplicity, but also what I would call the tier one feature sets. You had to deliver on six nines of greater availability. You had to have all the data management capabilities to plug into a large partner ecosystem like Veeam, which, you know, we're here at Veeam Live. And that was kind of what I would call act one of pure, which was, you know, flash array based, you know, storage for your traditional enterprise apps. Last year, we introduced FlashBlade, right? This was a radically different architecture. It was a scale out, a scale out blade based storage platform that scaled capacity and performance linearly. And the adoption in that space has been these next generation apps, which are just the data sets are growing, you know, out of control and beyond what we would have ever expected with an enterprise app. So whether it's AI, machine learning, deep learning, analytics, or this new use case we're seeing, which is a rapid data recovery, the FlashBlade because of the combination of its low latency and massive parallel throughput has really been a big growth vector for us. And it's kind of act two, if you will, of pure storage. Let's go ahead, Steve. Yeah, Vaughn, I'd love to hear more of your thoughts on kind of that application proliferation. So I think back, you know, you and I lived through that wave of virtualization. While I love virtualization, one of the challenges I had with it was I could take my old application that was probably already too long in the tooth and stick it in a VM and then keep it for another five to 10 years because it didn't care about the hardware, their OS and all that same point. Today, talk about cloud native apps, talk about IoT and analytics and all of these microservices and everything like that. It's a huge impact on infrastructure and how we build things. Brings up to speed as how we bridge from kind of the old world and the new world. Yeah, I'm glad that you asked this question. I wish you would be coming to our conference next week. Well, Dave will be there. Because we'll have a session discussing this and it'll include an internal case study and so that's all the details I can give right now. For a long time, I think a lot of IT vendors, particularly those who made hardware products, tried to position this on-prem versus the cloud, right? And it was really the wrong mindset. Cloud is just one more deployment model for an organization to look at. The question that I think organizations have is what fits where? And I think to your point, if you're looking to build a new application or replatform an existing, what you have today versus in the past was you had a contained set of APIs and interfaces to work with, right? If you were building on, say, a database vendors enterprise business suite, that was the tools that you got to use. Today you look at what's available in open source or in the public cloud space and you get to build a massively disaggregated application that's comprised of functions and microservices, right? And it gets to leverage these notions of scaling on demand and being very elastic. What I would share with you and what we discussed with customers is your development team will want to go as fast as they can and leverage all these new tools and they're iterating very quickly and the cloud is an ideal platform for that. But you need to plan and look forward as to around what's the volume of data that you may be dealing with? What's the access requirements to that data over time and where's it going to be a better position? Should it sit in the cloud? Should it sit on-prem? Should it sit in a private to public cloud hybrid type of architectural model and leverage, say, the compute and all the software agility within the cloud and yet still have stewardship over your data and not have to deal with maybe unforeseen things like charges per API call or egress charges, things of that nature. And Edge adds a whole number of things. So I'm grossly simplifying a lot of this, but these are the conversations when you get within the enterprise, which is really our sweet spot. These are real considerations that they have, right? They're past the, is cloud secure? They're past the data sovereignty type of concerns. They're more around, how's this going to scale long term? Because for example, I'll give you an example. So we rolled out Meta, which is our AI as part of our support for our product. It's all getting ahead of the customers and predicting faults, getting them. This is what helps us achieve greater than six nines availability across the entire fleet for the last two and a half years, right? It's getting ahead of the problems. When we work on looking at some of the AI that we create around Meta and we want to test it, we have to download a year's worth of phone home data from the cloud. That takes 45 days to download today. And it's not going to get any faster as the install base gets larger, right? And so those are challenges that you have to look at and say, maybe I started in the cloud but maybe I need to look at something in a hybrid model because it's going to impact my business agility. And so these are conversations that we can have and our architects have with customers based on whatever their criteria or forecast look like. So just about a year ago, Scott Deetson stepped down as CEO, brought in Charlie, new leader. It was kind of interesting. It was right in the heels of Frank Slutman doing something similar. Frank Slutman just stepped down as chairman. So how's the new leadership going? What has Charlie brought? I can't wait to interview him next week on theCUBE but give us your take as somebody who's been an industry observer and obviously a long time peer employee. Yeah, so great question. So just for the audience, Deetson is still with us, right? So he stepped down for being the CEO and is now the chairman of the board. And I owe a large gratitude of debt to Scott. Scott brought me into Pure and I've always encouraged when, you know, every now and then you get that direct email from him, you know, keep being a thorn in someone's side pushes forward. That was a little self-service, so I apologize. But what I like about Charlie is, and understand, I was with NetApp for 13 years, right? And so we did this large growth cycle, not as early as with Pure, but going through a lot of the same growth pains and whatnot that we have today. But we did all that growth under Wormenhoven before they changed over. What was nice about Scott is he told me on day one he didn't know how far he would take Pure, but when he was apparent to him that he had to take it as far as he could, he would find his air. And obviously that Charlie was the choice. And what Charlie's brought in has been a lot of structure, right? The formation of business units, a lot of accountability, a lot of what I would say, that maturation phase from startup, right? That's kind of grown to the maximum output of your current organizational structures to looking forward into a structure that is going to allow us to scale better over time, right? Continue to grow, as well as, I think Charlie would be the first to tell you, you know, Pure's on a trajectory to hit $2 billion and can do that on inertia in the current products, right? Charlie's focus, or one of Charlie's focuses over the last handful of months is, what are we going to become two years from now? And what investments do we need to start making in the near term to get prepared for two years from now? So I brought up Frank Slutman who's in service now because I know Frank and Scott are close, right? There's some board action going on there over the years. They're part of the Silicon Valley mafia with Amir Bhushri, and we can joke about that, but there's a culture of succession that has really taken hold in certain parts of the valley. And again, very similar to what we saw at service now, where the new guy was brought in to take them to the next level.  So it's been sort of this new thing. And I want to tie it back to something we were talking about before on theCUBE.  When you look back at the sort of the virtualization craze with 3PAR and Isilon, Data Domain, Compellent, yeah, they kind of hit billion dollar status, you know, they hit unicorn, but they never hit billion dollar revenue. And so now, and then the other thing you talked about was some of the bigger players decided to buy up flash companies. And they said, you know, rather than pay $2.5 billion for Data Domain or 3PAR, we'll spend a billion dollars or in some cases, hundreds of millions of dollars, and then we'll organically grow that internally. Some, did it work? Maybe, you know, maybe some of it, maybe not. But you guys stayed the course and are now on track to do 2 billion. So here's my question. Long-winded sort of narrative babble, sorry about that. I used to question Wurman-hoven all the time, Gucci even, can you stay independent? That was the big question, you know, because Converged is coming, but now it looks like being an independent is actually, best of breed, is actually still a viable business model. So obviously, I'm not on the inside of whatever the board decisions may be. So let's- Well, you're an observer who knows this business. Let's take that opportunity- We're kind of talking about like Von the prognosticator or analyst, if you will. What I think is different today, and Stu and I were talking about this because we ran into each other over in the corner with Duncan. You know, the emergence of all the flash vendors and them getting acquired and really what's happened by and large is just the same old products just got flash injected into them and, you know, the vendors hope to get another decade out of them. But okay, they're faster, but it doesn't fundamentally change your business model or your operations. Sometimes that's a good thing, right? For some customers, right? They're changed adverse. Right, they don't want that disruption. Yeah. For us, we're trying to usher in now this next wave of shared accelerated storage and it's a disaggregated model, right? Start to look up it at, you know, in a commercial sense, if you will, what are the hyper scalers, you know, delivering? You know, they're not running that direct attached storage or not doing HCI, right? They've got pools of compute and pools of storage and it's either disk and cold or it's flash, flashing hot. And, you know, they've got network and it's all over ethernet, so it's greatly simplified. We're trying to help our customers with that type of architecture, whether they're looking at simplifying their private cloud or extending the private cloud to the public cloud or what's even more interesting as they look at like their data pipelines.  They may or may not sit inside the IT department, but they tend to follow that model of, hey, it's in software, so I'm just going to do it on DAZ and then I'm going to build this siloed cluster and, you know, it must be cheap regardless of whatever the efficiency I get out of it and what we're trying to help large organizations look at is data pipelines and flow and the flexibility that you gain by separating compute from storage and not having to worry about the performance issues or constraints of disk based systems from a decade ago because technology is like flash and now with non-volatile memory express and non-volatile memory express over fabrics, right? You're getting direct memory to memory communications from the servers to the storage. So you're getting all the benefits of pooling and sharing your storage with all the benefits of if it was on a local bus in terms of speed and performance. And so it can change, particularly at large volumes of data, it can change your agility. So that is certainly a tailwind for you but it was a tailwind for a lot of companies and you have the product. Let's assume best product just for sake of argument. I'm sure you would agree but best product doesn't always win, right? So what I'm hearing is there was business model innovation. Yeah. Obviously, you had very strong go to market. Yes.  But there were other factors involved in your ascendancy which maybe is independent of the structure of the industry because the industry structure is changing. It's going from now remote cloud services into this digital matrix and somehow you have to fit into that digital matrix and participate in that. Yeah, it's, I think you brought up two points. So I think if you're going to be a startup to be successful, it's not just technology. You've hit the head on the nail there. Pure had, the technology had to deliver. Pure had that. The business model was innovative. The marketing was off the hook, right? For a startup, we were punching above our weight but you also have Salesforce execution and you never know what you get when you walk into a startup but if you don't hit on all four of those dimensions then you don't achieve escape velocity. In terms of shifting from startup to becoming mainstream, not only do we achieve a billion dollars last year, we were cashflow positive for the year and we were profitable for Q4, right? So that puts a lot of wind in ourselves as we go forward with at the end of last year, a half a billion dollars in the bank and now a billion dollars in the bank for us to go figure out what we're going to grow and grow into. I think moving forward and being independent, I think we'll see, right? I think there's always a tick tock in our industry, right? Things are distributed, they're centralized, they're distributed. I want one throat to choke, I want best to breed. I think with all the distributed apps and all the analytics platforms that are going to start to become more important than what we're used to in the X86 space, I think best to breed is starting to rise up right now and so I think the runway for pure to stay independent is there. Don't give a wrong, we're going to have to do our works with bubbling into clouds, right? And all those ecosystems because customers want a transparent experience but we'll be sharing some news on that I think next week. Excited to hear that.  But we love companies like Pure, put Nutanix in that mix and it was sad to us to see all that run of the virtualization companies that just disappeared because if it's just the cartel building new products, you're not going to have the level of innovation that you get with VC funded startups in the Valley, you just not. Well in the U.S. you're seeing, I mean you're in the U.S. you're seeing VC investment starting to diversify a bit, right? Colorado's getting hot. The Boston area has been there for a while but it's getting hot. For IoT and security. And that's been the great thing about IT and U.S., right? Is we've been an innovative landscape. I think the barrier has probably forced some innovators out based on just the cost of living. So who knows what the mix will look like a decade from now but yeah, we're still going to be Silicon Valley centric for the near term. So I love talking to you because we can have these conversations. We were joking off camera, we could go for 90 minutes which we easily could. We got to go soon. Let's talk about Veeam, the relationship with Veeam. You guys are kind of birds of a feather in a lot of ways but take us through that. Yeah, so the opportunity to partner with Veeam was a no-brainer. There were synergies there, right? Pure and Veeam, both trying to disrupt legacy markets, doing it through simplicity, right? Riding the wave of virtualization as a primary business focus but not exclusive. Our net promoter scores with both companies are off the charts, right? The customers love it and we're multiples higher than any of our competitors. And so bringing the technology together were real simple. So last month we announced, four or five weeks ago we announced and released a new set of solutions and integrations that was comprised around three areas of benefit, right? Accelerating backups, increasing the speed at which you could recover data and adding a new level of agility within your ecosystem. And so delivering those three value props were based on us supporting their universal API adapter so now that they can offload some of the backup process to array-based snapshots and that preserves the performance, makes the window collapse faster, that's when production data sits on the flash array. We've also certified putting the flash blade behind the Veeam servers as a backup data repository. And the benefits of that from a backup window are faster data ingestion times across your real estate, obviously smaller footprint, lower cost within the data center. The bigger impact on both of these is on rapid data recovery. So with Veeam, through their Explorer integrations, you can pull files, disks, VMs, applications, right out of the array snapshots. If the array is still online, but someone's just munched the data, if the array's no longer there and you need to pull from the flash blade, flash blade gives them a capability that they never had with disk, which is they can start, because you know how Veeam recovers, right? They actually start the data services and recover them from the backup repository and then live migrate it back to the production environment. With the data repository being all flash, now they can bring up a significant, if not all of your data back online and then trickle restore it back to the production data sets. We had a customer with a large distributed database that was on a more traditional disk backup system that was really focused on ingest, right? Make the backup window, not so much focused on the restore times. It took them in excess of 36 hours to put back their database and this was the mission critical database of the organization. We've come in and replaced that, 36 hours is now 30 minutes. So is all flash as a repository for your backup for everyone? Maybe not for every organization, but we're seeing a big growth ramp on that in the enterprise. The last piece that we've brought to market together and integrations is integrating with their data labs. That's their environment to be able to on-demand create test and dev infrastructures for you and that pairs really well with all flash arrays and snapshots because it's instantaneous, consumes no new storage and our automatic QoS preserves the resources for the production environment from the lab and so those are our three areas. Accelerate backups, rapid restores and give you some agility with your test dev. Okay, and the agility in the ecosystem is oftentimes underappreciated, right? I'm amazed at the customers that I, large enterprise customers, right? Revenues in the tens of billions of dollars that you still meet with today where they have staffs that their job is to restore an Oracle database to an Oracle developer and that's all the guy or gal does 40 hours a week. It's amazing. Vaughn, great to see you again. Thanks so much for coming to theCUBE. See you next week at Pure Accelerate at San Francisco where they're Wednesday, I believe, we're broadcasting. So look for all the things that Vaughn teased. He showed a little leg on some stuff so we'll be covering that next week. We're back here tomorrow. Stu and I will be kicking off at 9.30 with Peter McKay so don't miss that. We're out for today, Veeamon 2018, theCUBE. See you tomorrow.


a lot of our little vocabulary peculiarities here in Ireland and it's a great title as well it's a hundred words for grand and I don't know if there's a hundred but maybe there's close to that and there's all sorts of other phrases and words in there as well that we use every day and we think nothing of them and and sometimes it's only that you know when we're chatting to people from other countries and they go so sorry what was that you said that we realise just that our vocabulary has a lot of these phrases and words in them. The writer is Kunak McCann and Kunak now joins us live. Hi John how are you? Yeah good good good and let me just get you open the screen here as well so this is a well it's a bit unusual I suppose as well but how did the idea come about? Well I do I do love I've written a few books in this kind of area I do love looking at the things that make us a bit different and make us a bit you know unique really the Irish are we have we have an interesting use of language we always have and we have the kind of the mix of the Irish language coming in and we have lots of different local versions of phrases and things like that and I just love listening out for them and I love coming across them so it's fun to put a book like this together. Yeah because you've written Red Rover, Red Rover games from Irish Childhood and then co-written Irish Mammy in your pocket and the eighties there have been Irish in other books as well so this is a it's almost a variation I suppose of of a kind of all things Irish anyhow for sure and it's funny you should mention there about local variations because there's some of the the words here most of the words actually that I use regularly but then there's there's some then that have sort of regional variations if you like yeah and it's actually it's lovely to hear them and you know when I'm when I'm talking to people like yourself John and to other people other lovely radio hosts around the country it's great to hear you know people texting them with their own variations are saying oh we'd never use that one here but we use this instead so there's lots with a book like this you're never going to be comprehensive it's just not possible really with the Irish there's so many lovely little variations everywhere and there's no compendium so therefore there's nothing nothing to compare it to well exactly there's no one to say I'm absolutely wrong or absolutely right on anything either it's all kind of a little bit of everything in there and because most of us have been using them for a lifetime we think nothing off them and it's only you know when we're when we're in other English speaking countries and we and we just throw them into your casual conversation and then they're going sorry you have to explain that you know it's funny you should say that we have a woman a young woman working with us from America and she keep every time she comes across she the people use these phrases so casually and she thought somebody was playing practical jokes in her and she's saying banjax does that a word banjax I was like yeah yeah totally but every time we keep having this conversation she's like that can't be real I'm like yep it's totally real and and some of them are so real to us that you know you'd always be you'd always feel like saying well listen look it up it's in the dictionary it's got to be somewhere do you know and that's an interesting thing this not all this stuff is documented in you know in books and stuff a lot of it is it's verbal it's passed on from you know people in the same area or families and so on you won't see all of it written down you know some of the words and phrases come from old old English and some come from Irish yes they do quite so we have we have a great mix we we've take and we sometimes we'll take phrases that come from old English or middle English and then we put our own spin on them as well so we're you know where it language is always evolving so it's and it's we're a prime example of that and there's some lovely phrases like things like on the long finger comes from a lovely Irish that's an Irish language phrase putting things on the long finger or make the finger too short yeah and so there's there's lovely or splitting the stones is a lovely one that comes from the Irish language and and then you've got lots of things that come from say middle English so the word don't you know you might say to don't to don't on somebody and that comes from middle English but we've used it we've kind of adapted it we say ah someone's an awful don't isn't he a lovely don't and we've used that as a noun we also use it as an adjective he's don't he or she's don't he and she's don't he and that's again that's our own we've taken that the British are the English don't usually use that in that way or gallivanting is that that's gallivant I love that yeah because I think I heard it so much as a teenager would you go out haven't you had enough gallivant in there for one week that's great what run in the yard anyway okay let's let's do a little exercise here because in in in your book the way you do it is um on each page there's a there's a word or a phrase and then a little uh sort of below it how would you describe what's below it a kind of a little tongue in cheek definition I suppose uh just below it and then I give sort of examples of how it's used a bit of an explanation and then some examples of how they're used absolutely on the right hand absolutely great yeah okay so I'm going to give you the um the the little definition and I want I know you've written the book but there's a lot of a lot of words in here so is this is this a test this is a test this is a test now I'm going to give you the definition and I want to see can you give me the the word okay so um what about a thingamajig sorry you say that again thingamajig thingamajig that's yoke is not a great word yoke not that yoke the other yoke it's a great that's a great word and it covers everything and not just things for people oh he's a mad yoker she's a mad yoke as well we use the we're we're so sort of versatile in how we use language yeah we do use it in different ways yeah a lot of times I'm taking a gamble chance in your arm I'd say is actually that's a great story and I love that one so that's actually and it's got a literal meaning a literal kind of origin which is fantastic and it's from the 1400s and the the butlers and the Fitzgeralds were at kind of at loggerheads and it all came to uh you know it all came to uh uh what's that word it yeah it all came to an end when the two the two families were facing off at St Patrick's Cathedral and Gerald Fitzgerald literally had a whole cut in the door put his arm through to offer his hand in friendship to offer a handshake he literally chanced his arm so that was the first time that someone chanced their arm and sure the Irish have been chanced their arm ever since absolutely they live to tell the tale did he he did yes it works chance in your arm yeah yeah for sure all right oh you pass that one flying colors what about having notions having notions I would say far from that you were raised which is a great that's a great phrase and it's like the Irish we do have a bit of a bit of a reputation for begrudgery you know it's far from that you're raised and especially nowadays with the oud you know the old milk lattes and the frappa frappuccinos and all that sort of stuff just far from that she was raised it's great far far from that you're rare it would say around here yes and how about it runs in the family it runs in the family I'd say is he didn't lick it off a stone which again is a fantastic phrase or sometimes here we say it didn't lick that off the back wall off the back wall I love it that's brilliant yeah it's a bit more graphic as well isn't it I think you can actually see someone licking something out the back wall and absolutely jammers absolutely jammers I would say you wouldn't turn a sweet in your mouth is it yes which is which is a as a gas phrase I think I hadn't come across that one we didn't use that one certainly where we grew up I didn't I hadn't seen it either until the book yeah it's a great one isn't it literally there was it was so packed but you didn't have the room to turn a sweet in your own mouth yeah that's mad and isn't just what about lucky if you're if you're lucky well we used to always say jammy where I grew up I grew I'm a drama girl we always say jammy but I think in cork they use the word haunted again yeah I hadn't heard that one myself but I understand it's a it's a cork we got cork thing and and finally connect one of the good ones you would be what oh gosh there's probably a few because the Irish have a they've Irish have a whole rake of stuff it could be dead on sound sound as a sound is what I was looking for all of those ones yeah yeah or dead on they're both in the one page here yeah yeah we've got lots of words for people when we you know when we like them when we think they're you know they're a good person I hope you don't mind me saying but it'll be a great bathroom book it's it do you know what I won't run away from the phrase toilet read john if that's what people want to hurt we'll then go for it yeah okay well it's out now a brown press it's called a hundred words for grand gonna check out the hundred or flick through it at at your leisure it's out now the little book of Irish chat kunak thank you very much thank you john bye bye now Susie's eyes are green heavy and wise with all the things she's seen so tell me how does it go so young get caught by the devil's tongue and joey's eyes are blue


Hello to all of you, welcome back to another video of our 5 Reasons series. This time we will talk about corpus linguistics and we would like to give you 5 reasons for its importance. And as usual I have an expert with me who is well into the topic much better than I am. She is one of Germany's leading corpus linguists, Anke Lüderling from Berlin, also well known for her work in morphology and last but not least she is the secretary of Germany's Society of Linguistics. Welcome Anke. Thank you. I am happy to be here. So as usual I will not introduce our guest any further. Just google Anke Lüderling's name and you will find her straight forwardly on the web. But just in case, here is her website.  Let me ask you the usual question first, why did you become a linguist? Was there any particular motivation that triggered your interest in the field?  And when I was in high school my godmother who was an African scholar and she is at the University of Bayreuth, I was at that time, sent me all kinds of feminist literature and then there was a book by Luisa Pusch, you probably don't know her yet. I have heard of her. Yes. Marlis Helinger was one of my teachers. And I read that book and I found that very fascinating and radical, I mean think, 80s Ostfriesland. And on the back of that book it said that she was a linguist, so I thought I will be that. And then later when I actually asked my, we had to go to this kind of job center where they advised us on where to study, how to study, et cetera, I asked them where can I study linguistics, they said, well you're going to marry anyway, so you can do that, you will never be able to make money with that. But then of course when I started linguistics I found that fascinating, I never did any feminist linguistics at all. So that's a good motivation, but let's now talk about the five reasons for the dealing with corpus linguistics or with corporate linguistics. One reason is certainly that modern linguistics uses corpora for exemplification as example banks. Would you subscribe to that? Of course. All linguists always have used real examples from literature to exemplify whatever grammatical statements they make. Look at any linguists for English linguistics and German linguistics in the 19th century already. They always say blah, blah, blah, about, I don't know, let's say, genitives work this way as you can see from blah, blah, blah, blah, and then they give you all kinds of citations. How do you find those citations? Intuition, it was in the past, just intuition. No, no, no, they found citations, real literature citations from Goethe and blah, blah, blah. They've always done that. So they had to go to the library. So they had to read everything. And then you have a new topic, you have to read everything again. And then you have all kinds of file card systems to have examples for this construction, that construction, et cetera. Well, you can still do that, of course, but you can do that systematically, no. You can just type a query and then find something. And that's interesting. And I just want to mention one thing. What happens if you don't find an example of whatever you're trying to look at in your corpus? Many people have said, well, if you don't find an example, things don't exist. That's, of course, not true because language is infinite and you always have only a finite sample. Every corpus is only just a finite sample of whatever it's there. But if something that you expect to be there is just obviously absent, that might mean something. And you have to be careful with your conclusions, but you can actually learn something from things not being there. And that's not, and you can only do that using corpora. And what I learned from colleagues who are using corpora and myself is that corpus linguistics is especially important in language variation. Oh, OK. Yeah. Could you argue for that point, please? Yes. We all know that our linguistic behavior differs from situation to situation. I mean, just think of spoken informal dialogues or formal written term papers or whatever. We've always known that, but we've never known exactly which linguistic features depend on which other co-varying variables, as we call them, or independent variables. And that is the purpose of linguistic talk or whatever text. Dialogs between people. And also features that are speaker features, hearer features. Do I know you well? Do I like you? Et cetera, et cetera.  And I would talk differently now if I didn't, but we can only study that systematically once we have corpora, where all those external co-varying variables are in the metadata. And we find much more fine grained differences than we've always, than we've thought previously. Now, corpora don't just come from out of the blue. They have to be created. They have to be developed. And one principle of development is annotation. In what way can annotation be an argument for corpus linguistics? It's hard work, isn't it? Yeah. But it's helpful. Yes. And it's necessary. I think it's necessary for good scholarship, actually, because I think that one of the most important issues in linguistics is that you can make your analysis of the corpus data visible through annotation. I mean, just think of simple things like part of speech.  We all know what a verb is. But we don't all know whether a given participant, a given instance, is a verb or an adjective. In a particular context, yes. And so if I, I don't know, an analysis on participles, and I want to convince you of some grammatical point about participles, you should be able to see my analysis. And previously what we did is we have a text, and we analyze that text, and we categorize the words in that text. But we do that on a piece of paper, in a Word file, in Excel file, on a file card. And then we give you the reader, the colleague. We only give you the final finished analysis, but you cannot see the interpretation step. Annotation, finally, we can make that visible. And I think that's absolutely necessary for a scholarship. And I think we should never go back to. Yeah. So you would probably agree with me when I say modern linguistics is, well, almost impossible without corpus analysis. So we need corpora for quantitative analysis. Yes, we need corpora for many things. But I would not say that we need corpora for everything. But I think it depends on the research question. We also need other kinds of data, of course. I mean, corpus data can be augmented with other kinds of data. And then there are, of course, research questions where corpora are not useful, but corpora are useful for any type of quantitative analysis, because finally, you can count. You can count the words, you can count categories in the annotation, you can have interesting, more complex statistical models, finally, that you couldn't do before. You can use that for building hypotheses about language that you can then test using other corpora or using other means, like psycho-linguistic experiments or something, and you can actually model languages. That means you can build interesting models that will predict what could happen, and then you can see whether that really happens. And that's something that's never been possible for. Yeah, OK. Now, when we talked about this context, this content beforehand, you told me there's one final reason, a sort of, you called it, a meta-reason for using corpora. What can we understand by that meta-reason? OK. I think parts of linguistics are becoming more like science than like a humanity. And by that, I mean that finally, in certain parts of linguistics, for certain areas of linguistics, we want to have results that are testable and reproducible and replicable first, and then reproducible using other data. And corpus data, if it is available, if it is well documented, if you have enough metadata, and if you have annotation with everything there, like meaning documentation, evaluation, et cetera, then only then can you reproduce results. OK. So I think that's absolutely necessary. I understand. So thank you very much for this final plea. As usual with our guests, they could go on and on, because they know so much about the field. But we have to stop here because we want to produce short and concise videos, thus we have to confine ourselves to just these five reasons. So on behalf of all our viewers, thank you very much for your help, Anke, and all the best for your future career. Thank you. Thank you.


In 1909, a frail contraption was flown across the English Channel by Louis Blyriot. What this little plane could do impressed a young American who began to wonder even then about the military effects, not one but many flying machines in the air at the same time. That young lieutenant was Henry Hap Arnold. He was to become the commanding general of the greatest Air Force in history. Two and a half million men and 70,000 aircraft. Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Walter Matthow. This is the story of a man and his dream.  General Henry Harley Arnold, or Hap Arnold as he was known to all the world, was the personification of the United States Air Force. He attended its birth in its most glorious hour. The gigantic weapon that he created proved one of the key factors in the Allied victory that was won in World War II. But to his countrymen, Hap Arnold was more than a successful military figure. He was a man of great personal warmth, of uncompromising integrity and never-failing kindness. It is with pride and gratitude that we salute a great American. General Henry Harley. In 1911, when getting a heavier-than-air machine aloft was still something of a miracle, Second Lieutenant Hap Arnold was engaged in a project having nothing at all to do with flight, and everything to do with launching his military career. He was trying very hard to become a first lieutenant. Meanwhile, the discovery of the Wright Brothers was becoming increasingly interesting to the United States Army. The spirit of the Wright Brothers that a practical answer could be found to almost any problem was to be an inspiration to Hap throughout his life. The Wrights made it seem that anything was possible, creating an enthusiasm among young aeronauts that was sometimes carried to extremes. When Hap volunteered to learn to fly, his CEO said, I know of no better way for a person to commit suicide. Skeptical as many were, the Signal Corps had made concrete plans to obtain the necessary planes for a course of instruction. In school at the Wright Brothers Field at Dayton, Hap labeled all the parts. Long ago, before nomenclature became complicated, this was the way it was. From Dayton, Ohio, to the Chief Signal Officer, Sir, I have the honor to report the following progress made by me in learning to operate a Wright airplane. During the week, I've made 12 flights with an instructor and one flight by myself. My instruction under the personal supervision of the instructor in the machine is finished. And from now on, all my flights will be made alone for experience. Very respectfully, Henry H. Arnold, 2nd Lieutenant, 24th Infantry. Hap was one of the first qualified pilots in the United States Army. In later years, he never lost the glow of pride and the respect for this symbol of achievement. Hap was the first to win the Mackay Trophy for air reconnaissance. And in 1912, he set a high altitude record of 6,450 feet. In the earliest days of air mail service, he was one of our first troriers. All this experience in the Embryo Aviation Division of the Signal Corps helped him to train others to fly and put him in the front line of those gaining important knowledge about military aviation. Not only better planes and more thorough pilot training, but more men for servicing planes. These were problems which Hap seemed to grasp with a quick understanding. When World War I came, the nation was still only barely aware of aviation's military potentialities. Suddenly, we were in desperate need of trained flyers. From the ranks of the infantry and from all services, men were carefully selected for the aviation section of the Signal Corps. Even more important was our need for aircraft. Administrative problems, including aircraft production, became Hap's responsibility. On the home front, Hap began to learn some lessons that were to have great meaning when he was in command of the Air Force many years later. To produce aircraft for war, one must plan and build long before. Many were the planes and engines finished too late for combat. Hap firmly resolved that America would not be caught short again. With the war over, the nation relaxed, but for Hap and other American airmen, this was the beginning of a battle to convince Americans of the importance of air power. Using some old German battleships as targets, Billy Mitchell showed what precision bombing could do. In the post-war years, Hap was in the forefront of those, trying to keep the spark of interest in aviation alive. Sun flying seemed one of the ways. To average Americans, this was worth watching. Meanwhile, there were real steps ahead important to aviation's future. Safer parachutes, for example. Observation from the air became a means of keeping forest fires under control. In the winter of 1932, under Hap's command, there were airdrops of food to the snowbound Indians of the Southwest. This, one of the earliest airlifts, was a prelude to that in Berlin 16 years later. There were also experiments in the field of photo reconnaissance. There was help in the development of new bombers. In these years, Hap was carrying forth the program of building the air core. He was deeply convinced of its military importance. Helping to build the air core didn't interfere with building a lively family. These old home movies show time passing in the Arnold family and pleasantly. They reveal as do all pictures of Hap, the reason for his nickname, picked up in the days of West Point. The family reflects the dad's good humor, and the dad growing older and wiser still exudes the quality for which millions will soon know him. No moniker ever stuck more firmly to a man than to Hap. 1934, the B-10, a new all-metal plane carrying a 2,000-pound bomb load. Then the fastest bomber in the world. Under Hap's command, a long-range test flight from Washington, D.C. to Fairbanks, Alaska was undertaken to determine the feasibility of air operations in this part of the globe. Under extreme Arctic conditions, the mission, unusual for its time, was carried out successfully. On his return, Hap was honored with the Mackay Trophy a second time. 1938, on the day before Hitler won a victory at Munich, Major General Hap Arnold was appointed Chief of the U.S. Army Air Corps. We rise our nation to arm for air defense immediately. The strong air force is absolutely essential to keep war out of America. From the beginning, the Commander-in-Chief found in Hap someone he could rely on. He respected Hap's judgment. Together, they saw that time to build and expand had now become precious. Hap's plans went ahead. Planes for ground support, fighter bombers, long-range bombers, fast interceptors, an air force that was both tactical and strategic. Remembering the First World War, Hap pressed for the quantity production of aircraft that would be necessary for a global conflict, for a war of far greater proportions than the world had ever known. Each day was important now for building planes, for training men, pilots, navigators, bombardiers, gunners, and ground crews. The race against time was on. In these months, Hap worked tirelessly to mold the Army Air Corps into a fully prepared fighting service. Achievement came in spite of opposition from those who, even at this late day, felt that we were well protected by oceans on either side. Pearl Harbor brought into conflict with Hap. Pearl Harbor brought into critical focus the need for huge quantities of aircraft and past numbers of men to fly and maintain them. Well aware of the time and money involved, Hap had been steadily extending the Army Air Corps training program, coordinating this with our growing airstream. Since 1939, he had fostered the idea of having civilian schools help to train pilots in the first stage. Army Air Corps training had been systematized and it would include many young men from all walks of life. Not all were needed as pilots, or for that matter were meant to be pilots. Though some took to the air unsteadily, the huge quotas of trained pilots, mechanics, and other personnel were soon being met. Hap Arnold, a man at a desk with a huge task, requiring long-range planning and careful utilization of our limited air strength on a worldwide battlefield. Early in the war, isolated operations began to foreshadow the future effect of long-range bombing. The daring low-level raid on Tokyo was a carefully designed attack which brought home to Japan the real meaning of war. The leader of this successful mission, Jimmy Doolittle, was welcomed home by a much gratified chief. Hap always took great pride in the achievement of his men and they were made aware of his personal interest. In the following months of battle against the Luftwaffe, American pilots demonstrated a kind of bravery that did credit to the Army Air Corps and that heartened the nation. Whenever the opportunity afforded, there were frequent visits to his men. Always Hap was received with enthusiasm and affection. No commander was better liked, more deeply respected. As Hap went about the vast problem of building American air power, of deciding what types of planes for what specific purposes, a concept began to form in his mind. Perhaps this concept went back to the day when he first saw the plane in which a Frenchman had flown across the channel. That day when he thought, if one plane, why not many in the air at the same time? Now he saw the huge strength possible in mass formations of long-range bombers, each a fortress in the air, a multitude of flying fortresses in continued strategic bombing of the enemy, meanwhile destruction of the enemy air force in combat, air supremacy. This was his goal.  With production chief Bill Knudsen, he toured plants and factories. As time went on, as people came to know who Hap was and the job he was doing, his reputation grew. Deadly serious but always human. This was the way Hap did business. Thank you, Dr. Lloyd.  And if you wanted for your record, you can ask Captain Sheffield for it. And I'll be sure, I'm sure that he would be glad to give it to you. Now on with the show. I think that few people here are entitled to a little bit of background on this thing that we call air power. Air power. No one was better suited to talk about it than Hap or better able to put words into action to mold our air force into the strongest in the world. Hap's keen awareness of the significance of air power made him invaluable on the international scene. At many conferences, including Casablanca, Hap was able to work smoothly and effectively with our allies. But here, and for months to come, Hap was to argue for an idea that was not particularly acceptable. Mass bombing of the enemy during daylight hours. The plan was not greeted with favor. For at this time, the British were successfully carrying out a program of night bombing. While night bombing by the RAF was proving effective, it was Hap's argument that daylight precision bombing could cause far greater devastation than was possible during darkness. On the agenda at Casablanca were questions as to where the limited number of planes could be best utilized. General Arnold's plans received the green light from the other allied participants. In the Atlantic, serious damage was being caused by German U-boats. To meet the menace, B-24s were assigned to the anti-submarine command. The number of German submarines harassing our convoys began to decline. In the Far East, there were other problems. Hap went over the air needs of this theater with General Joseph Stillwell and General Chanel. Here it was decided that a difficult flying route over the Himalayas could provide a flow of supplies to the Chinese. The airlift over the hump was one of the extraordinary accomplishments of the war. Hap, as commanding General U.S. Army Air Forces, was a member of the allied staff, which met to determine the future course of the war. Here at the Cairo Conference and at Quebec, Hap became known for his judgment in common sense. Among leaders of other nations, Hap was not only the good-natured man with the encyclopedic knowledge of planes and all matters concerning air power. He was a first-rate diplomat upon whom our military staff could depend. By this time, there was complete acceptance of Hap's daylight bombing program by the allied command. Hap had won a personal victory in a difficult realm. Pilots had been needed in large number early in the war and with Hap's encouragement, a women's branch of the Air Force was organized. The women's Air Force service pilots, known as the WASPs, did a tremendous job during the war freeing many Air Force pilots for combat duty. At the first graduation ceremony, Hap was the honored guest. August 2nd, 1943. The 9th Air Force carried out the hazardous low-level raid on a strategic target. Ploesti oil fields in Romania. 177 B-24 liberators from the Tripoli area seriously damaged these important oil-producing fields. By 1944, the program for massive high-altitude air bombardments began to reach its peak. Now at last, thousands of strategic bombers with new long-range fighter escorts were over Germany at the same time. And now the question was, could this tremendous all-out effort be continued? There was no letter. There had been thorough planning in every detail that had placed the thousands of planes over Germany at the same time. No one was more instrumental in achieving our long-range plan for strategic bombing of the enemy than Hap Arnold. Through his effort, nothing had been allowed to stand in the way of the plan to use air power to knock Germany out of the war. At the end, we were unmolested in the skies, total air supremacy. At the close of the war in Germany, at the conference in Potsdam, Hap participated in plans for the unfinished work in the Pacific. And after this conference, Hap, with the glow of victory still upon him, recognized the contributions of all the services in the defeat of Germany. This is an appropriate occasion for we are celebrated tonight, the 38th birthday of military air power in the United States. At this time, the newest of the service, services of knowledge, the depth it owes to the armies of our land and the navies of our states. We dip our wings to their glorious traditions. And tonight, particularly, I want also to salute all of those who fly and those who make flying possible, be they of the Marines or of the Navy, or in civilian aviation in any of its many forms, or in the Army Air Forces, for they have all played a part in winning this war. Now able to concentrate full attention on the war with Japan, he flew to bases in the Pacific. Friendly and good-natured, he found what he wished to know without seeming to try. Receptive, even tempered, he was on the best terms with his commanders, extremely sensitive to their problems. Now, according to plan, what had knocked out Germany could do the same in Japan. The B-29, the pioneer of air intercontinental bombers, the plane which, thanks to Hap's convictions and leadership, had been in the works long enough to be ready. Three months after VJ Day, General of the Army, Hap Arnold, terminated 42 years of service. Hap lived to see his greatest dream come true. On September 18, 1947, the creation of a separate service, the United States Air Force. Five years after retirement, his full life came to a close. He was buried at Arlington Cemetery in January 1950. Hosts of devoted friends mourned his passing. Throughout the nation, there was a sense of deep personal loss. There's much to remind us of his role in American air power. This is the Arnold Engineering Development Center at Tollihoma, Tennessee. Not only in name, but in spirit, was General Arnold identified with this center, devoted to research and development in the Air Force to problems of air and space engineering. Since his time, much has happened, and in many ways, what he stood for has come to pass. It was Hap Arnold who sought the best in aircraft and material. Continuous experimentation, development, progress in the air. He was foremost in urging a separate Air Force for defending America in the skies. It was he who urged a strategic air command, our global atomic striking force, a massive deterrent to the threat of war. It was he who advocated an Air Force second to none, as a means not only of defense, but of preventing another global catastrophe. He saw the need for greater public interest in matters of air power. Without awareness and support, no nation could expect to remain strong. As the years go by, as we move faster and faster in and into the age of space, one influence above all seems now more lasting. It was General Arnold who envisioned an institution to train Air Force leaders, capable of guiding our nation's air defense. Whatever the future, the Air Force Academy, and every man who is honored to attend there, is profoundly touched by his influence. Here there is thoroughness and dedication to the task. The standards at the academy stem in large measure from the example set by the first Air Force leader, who in June 1949 was made the first general of the Air Force. From this academy that was once his vision will come other leaders with the training, background and spirit, and with their own vision of what must be done. Such men will help keep America free, as did half Arnold.