한국어 고급학습자들의 한국어 주어 인식 연구
A study on the perception of Korean subjects of advanced Korean learners
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study is to examine how advanced learners perceive the subject of Korean sentences and whether they properly grasp the corresponding relationship of magic in order to educate Korean learners to recognize the correct subject. Texts in Korean were distributed to advanced Korean learners, and in sentences that were judged to have a subject, the subject was found and underlined, and in sentences that were judged to have been omitted, the subject was restored and inserted. It can be seen that advanced learners are high-level learners of topic level 6 or higher, but they do not accurately recognize subjects omitted from Korean sentences through data analysis that identified subjects. First of all, it should be recognized that the subject of Korean sentences is sometimes omitted or not omitted. The cases in which the subject is omitted from the sentence are as follows. "If the subject of the preceding sentence is repeatedly used as the subject of the next sentence, if the object of the preceding sentence is used as the subject in the next sentence, that is, if the subject is an unspecified number, that is, if it is a formal subject, then the author (writer) that can be used as a first person pronoun," and "indicative pronoun used as an indication of the previous sentence." This is because the subject of the preceding clause and the subject of the following clause are omitted despite the difference between the subject of the preceding clause and the subject of the following clause, especially the case where the subject of the preceding clause is omitted despite the difference between the subject of the preceding clause and the subject of the following clause. When the subject is omitted, an indication expression is given, but when the subject is omitted, it is considered that it is a type that is difficult for advanced learners. This is because the focus is not on the fact that the subject omitted from the sentence should be restored to compose the sentence, but it is necessary to understand what the omitted component is, so that it can be translated into an accurate sentence in consideration of the subject corresponding to the predicate when translating. In addition, it should be possible to accurately recognize the subject even in sentences in which the subjective survey 'in' is combined with a noun that expresses a group among the subjects that are not omitted, and in addition, in sentences expressed by changing the survey that combines with the original sentence component to another survey for emphasis function. Although not a large number of learners, there are cases in which they are not recognized as subjects, suggesting that advanced learners should be given education. Finding the omitted subject, the omitted subject, especially in the compound sentence, will not be easy for foreign learners. However, it is necessary to find a way to find the subject of the entire sentence and the subject of the inner sentence or the connection statement. One way to present is to find the predicate in the sentence first and find the corresponding subject. The academic significance of this study can be found in that it is the first study on how high-level Korean learners perceive Korean subjects and emphasizes the need for subject education in Korean sentences for high-level learners, although this study has limitations in that it did not deal with various texts and did not target more learners.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine how advanced learners perceive the subject of Korean sentences and whether they properly grasp the corresponding relationship of magic in order to educate Korean learners to recognize the correct subject. Texts in Korean were distributed to advanced Korean learners, and in sentences that were judged to have a subject, the subject was found and underlined, and in sentences that were judged to have been omitted, the subject was restored and inserted. It can be seen that advanced learners are high-level learners of topic level 6 or higher, but they do not accurately recognize subjects omitted from Korean sentences through data analysis that identified subjects. First of all, it should be recognized that the subject of Korean sentences is sometimes omitted or not omitted. The cases in which the subject is omitted from the sentence are as follows. "If the subject of the preceding sentence is repeatedly used as the subject of the next sentence, if the object of the preceding sentence is used as the subject in the next sentence, that is, if the subject is an unspecified number, that is, if it is a formal subject, then the author (writer) that can be used as a first person pronoun," and "indicative pronoun used as an indication of the previous sentence." This is because the subject of the preceding clause and the subject of the following clause are omitted despite the difference between the subject of the preceding clause and the subject of the following clause, especially the case where the subject of the preceding clause is omitted despite the difference between the subject of the preceding clause and the subject of the following clause. When the subject is omitted, an indication expression is given, but when the subject is omitted, it is considered that it is a type that is difficult for advanced learners. This is because the focus is not on the fact that the subject omitted from the sentence should be restored to compose the sentence, but it is necessary to understand what the omitted component is, so that it can be translated into an accurate sentence in consideration of the subject corresponding to the predicate when translating. In addition, it should be possible to accurately recognize the subject even in sentences in which the subjective survey 'in' is combined with a noun that expresses a group among the subjects that are not omitted, and in addition, in sentences expressed by changing the survey that combines with the original sentence component to another survey for emphasis function. Although not a large number of learners, there are cases in which they are not recognized as subjects, suggesting that advanced learners should be given education. Finding the omitted subject, the omitted subject, especially in the compound sentence, will not be easy for foreign learners. However, it is necessary to find a way to find the subject of the entire sentence and the subject of the inner sentence or the connection statement. One way to present is to find the predicate in the sentence first and find the corresponding subject. The academic significance of this study can be found in that it is the first study on how high-level Korean learners perceive Korean subjects and emphasizes the need for subject education in Korean sentences for high-level learners, although this study has limitations in that it did not deal with various texts and did not target more learners.
참고문헌 (22)
- 강창석, "국어 문법과 주어", 개신어문연구, 33, pp.47~77 (2009), 개신어문학회
- 김영국, "주제와 주어 : 영어와 한국어의 비교 연구", 언어연구, 26(2), pp.1~14 (2009), 경희대학교 언어연구소
- 김은일, "주어 생략과 모호성 조건", 언어과학연구, 37, pp.93~112 (2006), 언어과학회
- 남기심, "표준국어문법론" (2011), 탑출판사
- 르우티낌옌, "한국어 베트남어 번역 텍스트에 나타난 대용표현 연구", 어문논집, 95, pp.139~176 (2023), 중앙어문학회
- 목정수, "한국어, 보편과 특수 사이" (2013), 태학사
- 목정수, "한국어의 진성 주어를 찾아서", 어문연구, 44(3), pp.7~46 (2016), 어문연구학회
- 박은정, "조사 ‘이", 가’와 ‘은, 우리말글, pp.2022, 94[DOI]
- 박은정, "한국어 번역 전공 학습자들의 번역 글쓰기와 L2 글쓰기에 나타난 언어 간 영향 연구", 국제어문, 95, pp.525~550 (2022), 국제어문학회
- 박찬영, "글쓰기 달인이 되려면 잘못된 문장부터 고쳐라" (2015), 리베르 출판사
- 박청희, "주어와 서술어의 생략 현상 연구", 우리말연구, 32, pp.39~61 (2013), 우리말학회
- 송현정, "성분 호응에 관한 국어교육적 소고-주어와 서술어의 관계를 중심으로-", 국어교육연구, 5, pp.93~108 (1998)
- 유형선, "한국어 주어 연구사", 순천향인문과학논총, 12, pp.5~20 (2004), 순천향대학교 인문과학연구회
- 이동혁, "대학 글쓰기에서 주어 사용 오류의 현황 분석과 주어 사용 지도 방안", 한말연구, 25, pp.191~210 (2009), 한말연구학회
- 이연정, "주어와 주어 교육" (2015), 신구문화사
- 이홍식, "주어에 관련된 몇 문제에 대하여", 어문연구, 42(4), pp.7~34 (2013), 한국어문교육연구회
- 정연창, "주어 생략에 대한 소고", 언어과학, 14(2), pp.101~120 (2007)
- 허용, "한국어 역번역문에 나타난 ‘이", 가, 은, 한국언어문학, pp.2019, 109[DOI]
- Li, C. N., "Subject and topic", pp.457~489 (1976), Academic Press
- Petch-Tyson, S., "Learner English on computer", pp.107~118 (1998), Addison Wesley Longman
- Paegelow, R. S., "Back translation revisited : Differences that matter(and those that do not)", The ATA Chronicle, 1, pp.22~ (2008)
- Paquot, M., "Twenty Years of Learner Corpus Research: Looking back, Moving ahead", pp.377~387 (2013), Presses Universitaires de Louvain
