중국인 한국어 학습자들과 한국어 모어화자들의 사과전략 비교
Apology Strategy Comparison between Chinese KSL Learners and Korean Native Speakers
2
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
There is a lack of research on comparative and sociopragmatic apology strategies between Korean native speakers and Chinese KSL (Korean as a second language) learners. This paper compares apology strategies between 232 Korean native students and 73 Chinese KSL students, employing 8 situations from the DCQ (Dialogue Construction Questionnaire) used by Bergman & Kasper (1993) and Maeshiba et al. (1996). The study results show that the two groups employed different apology strategies in the same situations given in the DCQs. The Chinese KSL students used substantive apology strategies including IFID, taking on responsibility and offer of repair; the Korean students used ritual apology strategies including IFID, downgrading responsibility and opting out in the same situations. Also, the Korean students employed different strategies according to severity of offence and power relationships. However, the KSL students’ strategies did not show any differences in power as a social factor. These results indicate that the different apology strategies between the two groups can lead to “cross-cultural pragmatic failure” (Thomas, 1983) and make cultural conflicts in their communications in Korean. Thus, it is suggested that sociopragmatically comparative apology speech act should be included in Korean language education.
Abstract
There is a lack of research on comparative and sociopragmatic apology strategies between Korean native speakers and Chinese KSL (Korean as a second language) learners. This paper compares apology strategies between 232 Korean native students and 73 Chinese KSL students, employing 8 situations from the DCQ (Dialogue Construction Questionnaire) used by Bergman & Kasper (1993) and Maeshiba et al. (1996). The study results show that the two groups employed different apology strategies in the same situations given in the DCQs. The Chinese KSL students used substantive apology strategies including IFID, taking on responsibility and offer of repair; the Korean students used ritual apology strategies including IFID, downgrading responsibility and opting out in the same situations. Also, the Korean students employed different strategies according to severity of offence and power relationships. However, the KSL students’ strategies did not show any differences in power as a social factor. These results indicate that the different apology strategies between the two groups can lead to “cross-cultural pragmatic failure” (Thomas, 1983) and make cultural conflicts in their communications in Korean. Thus, it is suggested that sociopragmatically comparative apology speech act should be included in Korean language education.
참고문헌 (32)
- 김남국, "한국 대학생 영어 중간언어의 사과화행 분석 및 적합도 평가", 영어영문학연구, 50(2), pp.45~74 (2008), 한국중앙영어영문학회[DOI]
- 김인규, "대학 사회에서의 한국어 사과 화행 연구", 한국언어문화학, 5(1), pp.195~234 (2008), 국제한국언어문화학회
- 김진무, "사과화행의 화용론적 분석", 프랑스어권 문화예술연구, 37, pp.59~94 (2011), 프랑스문화예술학회[DOI]
- 김혜련, "사회문화적 능력과 언어전이: 한국어와 영어에서의 사과의 경우", 사회언어학, 5(2), pp.191~219 (1997), 한국사회언어학회
- 손세모돌, "한국어와 중국어의 사과표현 대조 연구", 국제어문, (55), pp.183~249 (2012), 국제어문학회
- 유경애, "한국 대학생들의 사과화행 인식과 평가: 공손성의 범문화적 비교 가능성의 탐색", 영어학, 13(3), pp.601~625 (2013), 한국영어학회[DOI]
- 이해영, "비교문화적 화용론의 관점에서 본태국인 한국어 학습자의 사과 화행 연구", 한국어교육, 27(3), pp.233~260 (2016), 국제한국어교육학회[DOI]
- 임영철, "사죄행위의 사회화용론적 일고찰", 사회언어학, 5(1), pp.89~110 (1997), 한국사회언어학회
- 전정미, "사과행위의 표현 양상", 담화와 인지, 13(3), pp.167~188 (2006), 담화·인지언어학회
- Austin, J. L., "How To Do Things with Words" (1962), Harvard University Press
- Bergman, M. L, "Interlanguage Pragmatics", pp.82~107 (1993), Oxford University Press
- Blum-Kulka, S., "Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies" (1989), Ablex
- Blum-Kulka, S., "Request and apologies: A cross-cultural study of realization patterns (CCSARP)", Applied Linguistics, 5, pp.196~213 (1984)
- Brown, P, "Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage" (1987), Cambridge University Press
- Coulmas, F., "Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech", pp.69~91 (1981), Mouton
- Goffman, E., "Relations in Public: Microstudies of the Public Order" (1971), Basic Books
- Homes, J., "Sex differences and apologies: One aspect of communicative competence", Applied Linguistics, 10(2), pp.509~529 (1989)
- Homes, J., "Apologies in New Zealand English", Language in Society, 19, pp.155~199 (1990)
- Hymes, D. H., "Sociolinguistics: Selected Readings", pp.269~293 (1972), Penguin
- Kim, H., "The semantic and pragmatic analysis of South Korean and Australian English apologetic speech acts", Journal of Pragmatics, 40, pp.257~278 (2008)
- Maeshiba, N., "Speech Acts across Cultures: Challenges to Communication in a Second Language", pp.155~187 (1996), Mouton de Gruyter
- Olshtain, E., "Language Transfer in Language Learning", pp.232~249 (1983), Newbury House
- Olshtain, E., "Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies", pp.155~173 (1989), Ablex
- Olshtain, E., "Sociolinguistics and Language Acquisition", pp.18~35 (1983), Newbury House
- Oriermann, E., "On Apologizing in Negative and Positive Politeness Cultures" (2009), John Benjamins
- Owen, M., "Apologies and Remedial Interchanges: A Study of Language Use in Social Interaction" (1983), Mouton de Gruyter
- Searle, J. R., "Indirect speech acts", Syntax and Semantics, 3, pp.59~82 (1975)
- Thomas, J., "Cross-cultural pragmatic failure", Applied Linguistics, 4(2), pp.91~112 (1983)
- Trosborg, A., "Apology strategies in natives", nonnatives, 1987, pp.11(2), 147~167
- Trosborg, A., "Interlanguage Pragmatics: Request, Complaints and Apologies" (1995), Mouton de Gruyter
- Wolfson, N., "Cross-cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies", pp.174~196 (1989), Ablex
- 유경애, "Perceptions and Functions of Korean Mianhada: Comparison with American English Sorry", 사회언어학, 25(2), pp.197~224 (2017), 한국사회언어학회[DOI]