서울대학교 중앙도서관
S-Space 소개
My S-Space
로그인이 필요합니다.
Login

S-Space

Publications

Detailed Information

Korean Middle School Students Use of English Verb-Argument Constructions and Pause Patterns in L2 Speaking : 한국 중학생 학습자들의 제2외국어 말하기에서 나타난 영어 동사논항구조 및 휴지양상

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.advisor양현권-
dc.contributor.author이하림-
dc.date.accessioned2017-07-19T02:28:59Z-
dc.date.available2017-07-19T02:28:59Z-
dc.date.issued2012-08-
dc.identifier.other000000004641-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10371/127544-
dc.description학위논문 (석사)-- 서울대학교 대학원 : 외국어교육과(영어전공), 2012. 8. 양현권.-
dc.description.abstract제 2언어 말하기는 CLT에서 중요한 언어능력으로 자리매김을 해왔으나 제2언어 유창성에 대한 학자들간의 견해는 여전히 분분하다. 특히, 제2언어 유창성 측정에 있어서 문법적 측면에 대한 고려가 이론적 및 교육적 차원에서 배제되었다. 본 연구는 이 부분에 초점을 두어, 영어를 외국어로 학습하는 한국인 중학생들의 유창성을 그들의 발화양태에서 드러난 동사와 논항구조 그리고 휴지양상을 중심으로 살펴보며, 구문문법 (Construction Grammar) 틀 내의 논항구조구문이 제2언어 유창성의 측정단위에 포함될 필요가 있음을 제안한다.
중학교 1-3학년 29명을 대상으로 실시 된 본 연구에서, 학습자들은 짝을 지어 세 개의 역할극과 세 개의 주제중심대화 과업에 참여하였다. 학습자들의 녹음 된 대화는 대화분석기법을 사용하여 분석되었다. 학습자들이 가장 빈번하게 사용한 동사, 논항구조 그리고 핵심구문의 문장요소들이 확인되었으며 학습자 발화에서 나타난 휴지양상을 특히 동사와 논항의 위치를 중심으로 살펴보았다.
분석결과 학습자들은 영어능숙도와는 상관없이 한정된 종류의 동사와 논항구조구문(예, SVC, SVO)을 사용했으며 핵심구문의 문장요소들 역시 제한적이었다. 이러한 결과는 구문에 대한 학습자들의 지식의 부재와 담화맥락상의 제약에서 기인하는 것으로 분석된다.
논항구조구문의 관점에서 분석 된 휴지양상에 관해서는, 학습자들의 휴지분포가 논항구조구문에 관한 지식과 관련된 것으로 논의되었다. 즉, 하위 학습자들은 술어(본동사)와 논항 사이에서 빈번하게 휴지하는 반면 상위 학습자들은 술어(본동사) 앞에서 휴지하는 경향을 보였다. 이것은 영어 능숙도가 높은 학습자일수록, 술어(본동사)와 내재적 논항을 하나의 단위로 인식하는 것으로 보인다. 따라서 본 연구는 학습자의 술어(본동사)와 논항과의 결합강도(Combinatory Strength)에 대한 인식이 학습자의 휴지패턴에서 핵심적인 역할을 하며, 이 결합강도는 논항구조구문 생성능력에 의해 상당부분 조정될 가능성이 있음을 제안한다.
본 연구는 논항구조구문 관점의 휴지양상 분석결과를 바탕으로 논항구조구문이 제2언어 유창성 측정단위로 통합 될 필요성을 제안함으로써, 제2언어 유창성에 대한 이해를 넓히고 나아가 향후 연구와 교수에 대한 시사점을 제공할 것으로 기대된다.		-
dc.description.abstractSince L2 speaking has been marked as a central language skill in CLT, the perspectives on L2 oral fluency (henceforth, L2 fluency) remain contentious. In particular, the issue of the consideration of grammatical aspects in measuring L2 fluency has been largely neglected in the theoretical and pedagogical practices. Therefore, the present study aims to examine Korean EFL learners fluency by analyzing their oral production in terms of verb-argument constructions (VACs), and pause patterns. Consequently, this study supposes that VACs under the framework of Construction Grammar needs to be included in L2 fluency measuring units.
A total of 29 Korean middle school EFL students from Grade 1 to 3 participated in this study. They carried out three role-playing tasks and three topic-based conversation tasks in pair work. Their oral production was recorded and then transcribed by means of the general conventions from Conversation Analysis. The most frequently occurring verbs, argument structure constructions, and the islands inhabiting the core constructions were identified. L2 pause distribution, specifically at predicate (main verb) and argument position, was also analyzed.
Findings from the study revealed that across proficiency levels of the participants, the VACs produced did not differ significantly in range. All levels of participants tended to turn to constrained types of VACs, such as SVC and SVO, mostly employing a narrow range of verbs and the inhabitants of the islands. Such may be attributed to the learners lack of knowledge in constructions as well as to the inherent demand of spoken discourse.
Based on the analysis of pause pattern in terms of VACs, it was argued that the pause distribution within the predicate (main verb) and argument can be associated with the extent of participants knowledge about VACs. Namely, learners with higher proficiency may recognize a predicate and its internal argument as one unit. In particular, while the less proficient learners paused frequently before both a predicate and an argument, more proficient learners tended to pause mostly before a predicate. This study thus posited that learners ability to construct VACs, which entails learners recognition of the combinatory strength between the predicate and arguments, has an impact on L2learners pause distribution.
The study is expected to contribute to a better understanding of L2 fluency by incorporating VACs to L2 fluency measuring units, especially based on the analysis of pause patterns in light of VACs. Suggestions for pedagogy and future research were also identified.		-
dc.description.tableofcontentsTABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................... iii
LIST OF TABLES ..............................................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................... viii
LIST OF APPENDICES ..................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................... 1
1.1. Purpose of the Study ................................................................................ 1
1.2. Theoretical Framework of the Study ........................................................ 3
1.3. Organization of the Study......................................................................... 3
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................... 5
2.1. Conceptualization of L2 Fluency ............................................................. 5
2.1.1. Status of L2 speaking in teaching and learning contexts ................ 6
2.1.2. Previous studies on fluency ............................................................ 8
2.1.2.1. Definition of fluency ............................................................. 8
2.1.2.2. Theoretical backgrounds of fluency in the L2 speaking model ..... 9
2.1.2.3. Measurement of fluency ...................................................... 11
2.1.2.4. Pause pattern in fluency ....................................................... 12
2.1.3. Fluency in CLT ............................................................................ 15
2.1.3.1. Definition of fluency in CLT ............................................... 16
- iv -
2.1.3.2. Pedagogical framework in CLT ........................................... 16
2.2. Reconceptualization of L2 Fluency in EFL ........................................... 18
2.2.1. Implementing L2 fluency model in EFL contexts ......................... 18
2.2.2. Grammatical competence in L2 fluency ....................................... 19
2.2.3. L2 fluency revisited in terms of verb-argument constructions ..... 21
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................... 24
3.1. Participants ............................................................................................. 24
3.2. Tasks ....................................................................................................... 26
3.2.1. Role-play ...................................................................................... 27
3.2.2. Topic-based conversation ............................................................. 27
3.3. Procedures .............................................................................................. 28
3.3.1. Role-play ...................................................................................... 28
3.3.2. Topic-based conversation ............................................................. 29
3.4. Authenticity of Tasks.............................................................................. 30
3.5. Data Analyses ......................................................................................... 31
3.5.1. Investigating NNS spoken language in terms of VACs ................ 31
3.5.1.1. Counting clause units. .......................................................... 32
3.5.1.2. Sorting verb types ................................................................ 33
3.5.1.3. Syntactic properties of verbs ............................................... 35
3.5.1.4. Inhabitants of the islands constituting the core constructions ..... 36
3.5.2. NNS pause distribution ................................................................. 36
3.5.2.1. Pause distribution ................................................................ 37
- v -
3.5.2.2. Pause distribution in clauses with constructional error(s) ... 39
CHAPTER 4. RESULTS ................................................................................. 40
4.1. Verb-Argument Constructions in NNS production ................................ 40
4.1.1. Number of words and clauses ....................................................... 41
4.1.2. Frequency of verbs in each semantic category by tasks ............... 42
4.1.3. Top three most frequent verbs by category in each proficiency group .. 42
4.1.4. Most frequently used verbs in the top three semantic categories . 43
4.1.5. Syntactic patterns .......................................................................... 44
4.1.6. Two most frequent inhabitants of the islands constituting the VL, VOL, VOO, and VOR constructions ...................................................... 47
4.2. Pause Patterns ......................................................................................... 48
4.2.1. Number of pauses at each pause location ..................................... 49
4.2.2. Lengths of pauses at each pause location by proficiency groups . 50
4.2.3. Division of NNSs interlanguage by proficiency groups .............. 51
4.2.4. Pause lengths and locations by interlanguage grammaticality ..... 53
4.2.5. Pause pattern in the interlanguage containing constructional error(s) .. 58
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION AND FURTHER DISCUSSION................... 63
5.1. Summary of Findings (1) ....................................................................... 63
5.1.1. Verb-argument constructions ........................................................ 63
5.1.2. Further discussion ......................................................................... 63
5.2. Summary of Findings (2) ....................................................................... 64
- vi -
5.2.1. Pause pattern ................................................................................. 64
5.2.2. Further discussion ......................................................................... 67
CHAPTER 6. IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ....................................................................................................... 70
6.1. Overall Implications ............................................................................... 70
6.2. Suggestions for Future Research ............................................................ 71
6.2.1. Statistics. ....................................................................................... 72
6.2.2. Lengths, locations, and functions of pause in interlanguage ........ 72
REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 75
APPENDICES .................................................................................................... 83
ABSTRACT IN KOREAN ............................................................................ 111
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................ 113
- vii -
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Summary of Key Studies on L2 Fluency .................................................14
Table 3.1 Proficiency Level and Number of Students by Each Group ...................26
Table 3.2 Verb Categories by Semantic Groups ......................................................34
Table 3.3 Pause Locations ........................................................................................38
Table 4.1.1 Total Number of Words and Clauses by Proficiency Groups ..............41
Table 4.1.2 Three Most Frequently Used Semantic Categories of Verbs and Their Individual Items ........................................................................................................43
Table 4.2.1 Number of Pauses at Each Pause Location by Proficiency Groups ....49
Table 4.2.2 Total Lengths of Pauses at Each Pause Location by Proficiency Groups .....50
Table 4.2.3 Total Number of Grammatical and Ungrammatical Clauses by Proficiency Groups ...................................................................................................51
Table 4.2.4 Pause Lengths and Locations by Sentence Grammaticality ................54
Table 4.2.5 Pause Pattern in Sentences with Constructional Error(s). ....................59
- viii -
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Summary of Syntactic Patterns Used by Each Proficiency Group (%) ...46
- ix -
LIST OF APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1. ................................................................................................. 84
APPENDIX 2. ................................................................................................. 87
APPENDIX 3.
APPENDIX 3.1 ................................................................................................. 89
APPENDIX 3.2 ................................................................................................. 91
APPENDIX 3.3 ................................................................................................. 93
APPENDIX 3.4 ................................................................................................. 94
APPENDIX 3.5 ................................................................................................. 96
APPENDIX 4.
APPENDIX 4.1 ................................................................................................. 97
APPENDIX 4.2 ............................................................................................... 101
APPENDIX 4.3 ................................................................................................. 105		-
dc.formatapplication/pdf-
dc.format.extent1603710 bytes-
dc.format.mediumapplication/pdf-
dc.language.isoen-
dc.publisher서울대학교 대학원-
dc.subjectL2 fluency-
dc.subjectL2 spoken language-
dc.subjectverb-argument constructions-
dc.subjectpause pattern-
dc.subjectconstruction grammar-
dc.subjectgrammatical competence-
dc.subjectcombinatory strength-
dc.titleKorean Middle School Students Use of English Verb-Argument Constructions and Pause Patterns in L2 Speaking-
dc.title.alternative한국 중학생 학습자들의 제2외국어 말하기에서 나타난 영어 동사논항구조 및 휴지양상-
dc.typeThesis-
dc.contributor.AlternativeAuthorHa Rim Lee-
dc.description.degreeMaster-
dc.citation.pagesix, 113-
dc.contributor.affiliation사범대학 외국어교육과(영어전공)-
dc.date.awarded2012-08-
Appears in Collections:
Files in This Item:

Altmetrics

Item View & Download Count

Show Simple Item Record
Find it @ SNU

  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Share

qrcode
SNS Share