Cultural Translation of Debate in Korean
1
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Transformational processes of borrowed speech activities are addressed since the topic of debate. Debate is rooted in Western political discourse, and is now situated in Korean discourse. This study examines debate in order to understand the concept and rules of speaking which govern that activity. Considering the popularity of debate in Korean, particularly in educational domains, it seems only natural to see how Korean language/culture compares with and has modified a Western-oriented activity. The motivation of this current study is as a response to a prior lack of effort to look at language from a broader context. This study attempts to apply the ethnography of communication to debate proposed by Hymes (1964; 1972; 1974). From the ethnographic approach to communi-cation, speaking is inseparable from the context in which it takes place. The need to examine contextual factors is taken into conside-ration, and a set of components are identified to study language in use (i.e. setting, participants, keys, and norms). In this view, debate is analyzed as a cultural product. Findings reveal certain diverse features of ‘Koreanized’ debate. The language of Korean debate in expressing disagreement tends to be indirect. While agreement is directly expressed, disagreement is likely to be realized by means of disarmers and prefacing statements. The expression of oppositional opinion also becomes longer.
Abstract
Transformational processes of borrowed speech activities are addressed since the topic of debate. Debate is rooted in Western political discourse, and is now situated in Korean discourse. This study examines debate in order to understand the concept and rules of speaking which govern that activity. Considering the popularity of debate in Korean, particularly in educational domains, it seems only natural to see how Korean language/culture compares with and has modified a Western-oriented activity. The motivation of this current study is as a response to a prior lack of effort to look at language from a broader context. This study attempts to apply the ethnography of communication to debate proposed by Hymes (1964; 1972; 1974). From the ethnographic approach to communi-cation, speaking is inseparable from the context in which it takes place. The need to examine contextual factors is taken into conside-ration, and a set of components are identified to study language in use (i.e. setting, participants, keys, and norms). In this view, debate is analyzed as a cultural product. Findings reveal certain diverse features of ‘Koreanized’ debate. The language of Korean debate in expressing disagreement tends to be indirect. While agreement is directly expressed, disagreement is likely to be realized by means of disarmers and prefacing statements. The expression of oppositional opinion also becomes longer.
참고문헌 (34)
- Agyekum, K, "The Pragmatics of Akan Greetings", Discourse studies, 10(4), pp.493~516 (2008)
- Aijmer, K, "Conversational Routines in English" (1996), Longman
- Blum-Kulka, S, "Cross-Cultural Pragmatics" (1989), Ablex
- Brown, P, "Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage" (1987), Cambridge University Press
- Chung, M, (2008), Kyoyukkwahaksa
- "Kocen Munhakyenkwu", 2006, 409~446
- Duff, A, "An Ethnography of Communication in Immersion Classrooms in Hungary", TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), pp.505~537 (1995)
- Duranti, A, "Language in Context and Language as Context: the Samoan Respect Vocabulary In: Rethinking Context", pp.77~99 (1992), Cambridge University Press
- Edmondson, J, "On Saying You’re Sorry In: Conversational Routines: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech", pp.273~288 (1981), Mouton de Gruyter
- Farrow, S, "Debating and Its Discontents", Language and Communication, 26(2), pp.117~128 (2006)
- Fong, M, "‘Luck Talk’ in Celebrating the Chinese New Year", Journal of Pragmatics, 32, pp.219~237 (2000)
- Howe, M, "An Introduction to English Language Debate in Asia" (2005), Ewha Womans University Press
- Hymes, D, "Introduction: Toward Ethnographies of Communication In: The Ethnography of Communication", pp.1~34 (1964), American Anthropologist
- Hymes, Dell, "Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Life In: Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication", pp.35~71 (1972), Holt
- Hymes, Dell, "Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach" (1974), University of Pennsylvania Press
- "Tamwhawa Inci", 2001, 181~203
- Kang, T, (2001), Kemyunikheyishenpwuksu
- Kim, P, (2007), Kukhakcaryowon
- 김성희, "토의 능력 신장을 위한 토의 교육의 내용 연구", 사회언어학, 15(2), pp.31~55 (2007), 한국사회언어학회
- 김윤규, "Taking Turns in Class Discussions in English: Exploring Korean Graduate Students’ Experiences", Foreign Languages Education, 14(4), pp.49~72 (2007), 한국외국어교육학회
- "Hankwukmu-whakchongse", 2006, 219~243
- Lee, C, (2008), Mwunhakkwa cisengsa
- "박사", Seoul National University, 2000
- Lee, D-U, "Rethinking Goffman’s Theory and an Interact-tional Sociolinguistic Analysis of Debate", Enehak, 37, pp.197~221 (2003)
- "Khemyunikheyishyenhakyenkwu", 2008, 79~101
- Maduell, M, "On Stage Calls: An Ethnolinguistic Analysis of Spoken Language in Professional Flamenco Performance", 박사, pp.1994
- "Kwukekyoyukhak Yonkwu", 2004, 289~318
- 박용한, "TV 생방송 토론 대화에서의 대화 전략 연구 대화 구조 지배 전략을 중심으로 -", 사회언어학, 10(1), pp.169~196 (2002), 한국사회언어학회
- Saville-Troike, M, "The Ethnography of Communication" (1989), Blackwell
- Sather, Trevor, "Pros and Cons: A Debater’s Handbook" (1999), Routledge
- Searle, R, "The Classification of Illocutionary Acts", Language in Society, 5, pp.1~24 (1976)
- "Hankuk Kuntaymwunhakyenku", 2005, 9~41
- Song, K, "An Interactional Sociolinguistic Analysis of Argument Strategies in Korean Conversational Discourse: Negotiating Disagreement and Conflict", 박사, pp.1993
- Tusda, A, "Sales Talk in Japan and the United States: An Ethnographic Analysis of Contrastive Speech Events" (1984), Georgetown University Press