新HSK 4, 5급 어휘의 등가어, 비등가어 분석 －수용적 지식을 중심으로－
Receptive Knowledge Difficulty Analysis of New HSK Level 4 and 5 Vocabulary
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this paper is to verify whether the HSK level 4 or 5 vocabulary achieves internal homogeneity in the case of Koreans. We classified HSK level 4 and 5 vocabulary as equivalence words and non-equivalence words. We hypothesized that the mean score of equivalents would be lower than that of non-equivalence words. As a result, the average score difference between the equivalence words and non-equivalence words of the Level 4 verb was 38.40 points, the score difference between the adjective equivalent words and the non-equivalence word was 35.3 points, and the score difference between the adverb equivalence words and the non-equivalence word was 33.70 points. The difference between the average score for grade 4 equivalent and non-equivalent words was 35.8 points, which was very large. The average score for level 4 verbs is 79.5 points, the average score for adjectives is 80.8 points, and the average score for adverbs is 73.5 points. The average score difference between equivalence words and non- equivalence of level 5 verbs was 31.7 points, the difference between equivalence words and non-equivalence words was 29.2 points, and the difference between adverb equivalence words and non-equivalence words was 26.3 points. The difference between the average score of level 5 equivalence words and non-equivalent words was 29.1 points. The average score of level 5 verbs is 82.7 points, the average score of adjectives is 82.1 points, and the average score of adverbs is 83.2 points. Looking at the results of the above research analysis, it can be confirmed that the current HSK level 4 vocabulary is not homogeneous in difficulty between the vocabulary words for Koreans. It can be seen that the level 5 vocabulary of the new HSK is not uniform in difficulty between the same words.
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to verify whether the HSK level 4 or 5 vocabulary achieves internal homogeneity in the case of Koreans. We classified HSK level 4 and 5 vocabulary as equivalence words and non-equivalence words. We hypothesized that the mean score of equivalents would be lower than that of non-equivalence words. As a result, the average score difference between the equivalence words and non-equivalence words of the Level 4 verb was 38.40 points, the score difference between the adjective equivalent words and the non-equivalence word was 35.3 points, and the score difference between the adverb equivalence words and the non-equivalence word was 33.70 points. The difference between the average score for grade 4 equivalent and non-equivalent words was 35.8 points, which was very large. The average score for level 4 verbs is 79.5 points, the average score for adjectives is 80.8 points, and the average score for adverbs is 73.5 points. The average score difference between equivalence words and non- equivalence of level 5 verbs was 31.7 points, the difference between equivalence words and non-equivalence words was 29.2 points, and the difference between adverb equivalence words and non-equivalence words was 26.3 points. The difference between the average score of level 5 equivalence words and non-equivalent words was 29.1 points. The average score of level 5 verbs is 82.7 points, the average score of adjectives is 82.1 points, and the average score of adverbs is 83.2 points. Looking at the results of the above research analysis, it can be confirmed that the current HSK level 4 vocabulary is not homogeneous in difficulty between the vocabulary words for Koreans. It can be seen that the level 5 vocabulary of the new HSK is not uniform in difficulty between the same words.
참고문헌 (24)
- 고려대학교 민족문화연구원 중국어대사전편찬실, "중한사전" (2002)
- 성태제, "문항 제작 및 분석의 이론과 실제" (2004), 학지사
- I. S. P. Nation, "I. S. P. Nation의 외국어어휘의 교수와 학습" (2012), 소통 출판사
- Teng Shou-hsin, "현대중국어 교육어법법연구" (2005), 학고방
- Teng Shou-hsin, "현대중국어교육문법연구" (2012), 한국문화사
- 김석영, "중국어 평가 문항 작성 기법 연구 ― 신HSK, SNULT, FLEX 선택형 문항에 대한 비판적 분석을 중심으로", 중국어문학논집, (90), pp.261~288 (2015), 중국어문학연구회
- 김영은, "수용적 어휘 지식과 산출적 어휘 지식, 어휘 학습 전략의 관계", 영어어문교육, 14(3), pp.283~306 (2008), 한국영어어문교육학회
- 박용진, "한국인 중국어 학습자를 위한 필수문법항목 설계", 중국언어연구, (57), pp.357~384 (2015), 한국중국언어학회
- 박용진, "Prator의 난이도등급 가설의 검증 - 중국어 문법의 능숙도 시험 개발을 위한 분석 -", 중국어교육과 연구, (28), pp.285~308 (2018), 한국중국어교육학회[DOI]
- 서진현, "한국인 학습자를 위한 현대중국어 동사 등급분류 설계", 중국어교육과 연구, (21), pp.67~89 (2015), 한국중국어교육학회
- 이상희, "DDL 교수법이 영어 생산적 및 수용적 어휘 지식과 읽기 능력에 미치는 효과 연구", 언어연구, 35(3), pp.341~360 (2019), 한국현대언어학회[DOI]
- 진현, "한국인 학습자를 위한 HSK 동사 등급 탐구", 중국어문학, (87), pp.237~260 (2021), 영남중국어문학회[DOI]
- 孔子学院总部, "新汉语水平考试大纲 4, 5级" (2015)
- 中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室, "现代汉语词典" (2016)
- 孙晓明, "第二语言学习者产出性词汇机制研究", 汉语学习, (4) (2009)
- 张江丽, "汉语第二语言学习者接受性词汇量实证研究", 语言文字应用, (3) (2017)
- Henriksen，B．, "Three dimensions of vocabulary development", Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(3) (1999)
- Jiang, Nan, "Lexical Representation and Development in a Second Language", Applied Linguistics, 21 (2000)
- Laufer, B., "Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy" (1997), Cambridge University press
- Laufer，B．, "The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary in a Second Language: Same or Different?．", Applied Linguistics, 19 (1998)
- Laufer, B, "The Relationship Between Passive and Active Vocabularies: Effects of LanguageLearning Context", Language Learning, 48(3) (1998)
- Palmer, H. E．, "The oral method of teaching language" (1921), Heffer
- Schmitt, N., "Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test", Language Testing, 18 (2001)
- Stockwell, "The Grammatical Structures of English and Spanish. Contrastive Structure Series" (1965)