발행기관 내 간행물

  • 간행물 내 검색 검색

사회언어학

검색결과 :
9
전체선택 Endnote Refworks
Guo, JunHua. 2018. “A Study on Korean learners’ Awareness and Attitude about Academic Writing”. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 26(3). 1~30. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the awareness and attitudes of Korean learners about Academic Writing and to identify the problems which should be solved in academic writing education for Korean learners. For this, 62 foreign students were conducted a questionnaire survey, and 18 of them were interviewed to elicit their attitudes, perceptions about academic writing. A result of analysis showed that students have a very negative attitude towards writing. Moreover, they are not aware of the importance of writing. Therefore, they are negligent of writing and do not actively participate in academic activities. Second, students know the connection between general purpose writing learning and academic writing learning, but they have no systematic understanding of Korean academic writing. They simply gain knowledge of writing by imitating. Third, although they showed a willingness to be good at academic writing, they lacked subjective initiative on writing learning. And their writing study was centered on TOPIK. In order to solve these problems, this paper suggested solutions from an ecological perspective: language knowledge entry, learning environment, and learner’s self - growth. First, it is needed to help foreign students to have a systematic knowledge of academic writing as soon as possible. Second, outside the classroom, students should be offered a variety of opportunities to participate in academic activities.third, it is necessary to study the internal motivation of interest which attracts students’ attention and allow them to have a positive attitude about academic writing.
This paper aims to introduce some methods of terminology planning evaluation in order to establish a systematic and organized evaluation model. Although many countries around the world are currently implementing terminology planning in the midst of the massive influx of foreign words, their evaluation has not been properly conducted. In fact, an evaluation stage is essential to check the results of the planning so far and re-establish it in the future. It is therefore necessary to evaluate the planning in a scientific and rational way. The main notion in terminology planning evaluation is terminological implantation, which covers, 1) the planned and/or spontaneous processes by which a term is effectively and durably used in the language usage of the speakers and 2) the results of these processes. The terminological implantation can be measured by quantitative and qualitative ways. This paper employs a quantitative approach by using the terminological, which represents the frequency of the use of a term in a relative ratio. It can serve as a basis for a qualitative analysis of terminological implantation by quantifying how frequently a term is used in the language usage compared with other competitive terms.
The usages of ‘making apathy’ with the expression of positive treatment in the Japanese language and its factors were reviewed and analyzed in this study. ‘Making apathy’ with multiple expressions of positive treatment was used in a variety of personal relationships, and the factors of these linguistic behaviors could be classified mainly into two things; ‘making apathy to empathize the expression intention’ and ‘making apathy to show the expression intention unclearly.’ Out of these two, ‘making apathy to empathize the expression intention’ appeared more frequently, which could be considered the communication of perfect negative treatment not to aim a harmonious personal relationship with partners. On the other hand, ‘apathy expression to empathize the expression intention’ was used less frequently, which could be considered the negative treatment communication to maintain a harmonious relationship with partners to some extent. In terms of expression types, both ‘the things that can understand the expression intention just from the expression itself’ and ‘the things that can understand only if the context is understood’ were used variously.
This study discusses the social meaning of LHL% (rising-falling tone in IP final) in Seoul Korean, and shows the two kinds of LHL% contours that depend on the phonetic details of the contours. The data consist of popular “pseudo-reality” TV show called ‘we got married,’ where the female characters switch styles between a rational interview style and emotional, conversational style. What clearly characterizes the two styles is the phonetic pattern of LHL%—pitch and duration as the speakers use more phonetically extreme contours in a conversational style. The non-expressive LHL%, with the mild phonetic contour, functions as a “smoother,” while the expressive LHL%, with the extreme contour, has various emotional functions. Thus, this paper argues that while the “smoother” function can be the basis of social meanings of LHL%, the phonetic details, which make the variable more salient, are more important in shaping the social meaning and speaker stances.
This paper discusses ways to understand and cope with the issues of holism, generalizability, and representativity in qualitative research. More specifically, the article argues that critical sociolinguistic ethnography can serve as a useful methodological tool to uncover complicated processes and consequences of linguistic practice in social life in an increasingly globalized world. Drawing on Heller’s (2011) framework of critical sociolinguistic ethnography, the analysis underscores how critical sociolinguistics focuses on the analysis of the processes by which social actors access and mobilize valuable linguistic resources across time and space. The paper illustrates the situated research processes of doing critical sociolinguistic ethnography through two research projects on South Korean transnational English learners conducted by the authors. The article concludes with a discussion of how critical sociolinguistic ethnography may contribute to broadening research agenda in sociolinguistics in the era of globalization.
The sibilation of Korean nominal stem final coronal consonants is a common phenomenon in Korean spoken language. Many Korean speakers pronounce /patʰ-i/, /piʨ-ɨl/, /k‘oʨʰ-e/ as [paɕi], [pisɨl], [k’ose]. These are not standard Korean pronunciations. Therefore, Korean learners are supposed not to learn this phenomenon. However, a lot of Chinese Korean advanced learners acquire those pronunciations. In this paper, I try to find why the Chinese Korean advanced learners acquire this phenomenon. Unfortunately, the reason can not be found by traditional error analysis methods. It seems that this sibilation phenomenon occurs randomly and has no connection with the coronal consonants. We can only find that when nouns combine with the postposition in an adessive case this sibilation phenomenon hardly appears. I examined Chinese Korean advanced learners’ spontaneous speaking and then conducted a survey. I show that sociolinguistic elements make a great influence on this acquisition. Lastly, I discuss how to train Chinese Korean advanced learners on this Korean phonological phenomenon.
For Korean language learners, communication activities are an opportunity to actually apply their knowledge of the language to real life. The communication strategies used in this case vary according to situations and purposes. To examine the types of communication strategies used in each situation, this study analyzed the utterances of participants in speaking tests, counseling, and private conversations. It was found that communication strategies were used most frequently in private conversations, followed by counseling and speaking tests. As to purposes, communication strategies were used to resolve defects in target language resources, issues in self-utterances, and issues in the utterances of the other party of conversation. Furthermore, this study discovered that Arabic-speaking learners notably use communication strategies not only for the purpose of resolving communication issues, but also for the relationship-oriented purpose of building a social tie.
In this paper, we indicate various problems of kinship terms of address and reference in Standard Language Manners (2011) and propose modifications to the text. Standard Language Manners (2011) is a modified version of Standard Speech Explanations, updated to account for social changes. However, many problems remain in the updated text. For example, there are several unsystematic or asymmetric kinship terms of address and reference according to gender, age, rank, or marital status. Moreover, Standard Language Manners presents complicated kinship terms of address and reference based on extended family system, rather than a nuclear family system. To solve these problems we suggest several amendments. First, while we recognize the continual usage of traditional kinship terms of address and reference, we suggest that widely-used new kinship terms should be included if they are in common use. Second, lexical gaps or asymmetric kinship terms of address and reference should be filed with existing or new terms despite the limited redundancy this system may create.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate the usage of address terms between professors in a Korean university upon the methodology of sociolinguistic variation studies. This study was conducted based on on-line questionnaire survey targeting 100 professors in an university situated in the metropolitan area. Address terms observed in this study are Gyosu(=professor)(+honorific ‘-nim), Seonsaeng(=teacher)(+’-nim’), Baksa(=doctor)(+‘-nim’), Saem/Ssaem(intimate abbreviation of Seonsaeng), etc. which are ordered by frequency. Factor groups considered in this study are addressor, addressee, and situation. The main results of this study are as in the following. (1) Addresser’s academic field, degree of intimacy relation with addressee, and addressee’s administrative position are main factors having influence on the usage of address terms between professors. (2) Addresser’s sex and age factors and addressee’s sex and academic field factors have little or no influence on the usage of address terms.
1