View : 721 Download: 0

Full metadata record

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.advisor신상근-
dc.contributor.author고명진-
dc.creator고명진-
dc.date.accessioned2016-08-25T10:08:57Z-
dc.date.available2016-08-25T10:08:57Z-
dc.date.issued2010-
dc.identifier.otherOAK-000000057246-
dc.identifier.urihttps://dspace.ewha.ac.kr/handle/2015.oak/185891-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dcollection.ewha.ac.kr/jsp/common/DcLoOrgPer.jsp?sItemId=000000057246-
dc.description.abstractThis study examines the causes of communication breakdown and compares them between Korean teachers and foreign teachers. The study was carried out in a telephone conversation context. In this study, 12 adult language learners along with two Korean teachers and two Philippine teachers participated. Eighty recordings of 10 minute classes were extracted, totaling 800 minutes of recorded data. The recordings were repeatedly examined by a native-like speaker of English and verified once again by a second examiner who was also a native-like speaker of English. First, the cases of communication breakdown were analyzed. After the instances were reviewed, the data was transcribed into scripts. The Korean teacher group’s types of causes were compared to those of the foreign teacher groups. The categorizing process was carried out by checking audio files and transcribed data scripts. The findings of this study are as follows: First, the main types of sources for communication breakdown were the students’ linguistic resource deficits, the teachers’ insufficient background knowledge, and technical problems. Among these categories, the students’ limited decoding ability was the most frequent cause of communication breakdown. The students’ limited vocabulary was the next most frequent cause of breakdown. Second, the comparison of causes of communication breakdown and their frequency was carried out for the groups of Korean and foreign teachers. There was no significant difference in the frequency of the sources of trouble between two groups. The foreign teachers lacked the knowledge the Korean teachers had regarding the students’ country and language. This resulted in more cases of communication breakdowns. The difficulties seem inevitable due to the cultural gap between foreign teachers and students. Moreover, some cases remained unsolved after the negotiation of meaning process. This finding showed that some cases of communication breakdown failed to be resolved due to the difference in background knowledge between teachers and students. More technical problems were detected with foreign teachers. This was due to the bad connection provided by the internet overseas calling service. Although there was a significant difference in the communication problem caused by the students’ limited vocabulary, it was found that the differences were based on the individual teacher’s use of vocabulary rather than the teacher group’s language background. Another significant difference was detected from the student’s inaccurate pronunciation. The foreign teachers had more difficulties in understanding the students’ inaccurate pronunciation. The results showed that the foreign teachers had more difficulties in understanding the words that were pronounced with a Korean accent. In addition, the students in the Korean teacher group had more communication difficulties in understanding the pronunciation of words as well as in the misinterpretation of the teacher’s utterance among the subcategories of the students’ lack of decoding ability. Regarding the students’ non-understanding of the teacher’s words, the transcribers judged that the words were understandable. Accordingly, the individual student’s ability was the main factor to discern the pronunciation of the words. The findings showed that all cases of the student’s misinterpretation of the teacher’s utterance in the Korean teacher group were produced by one student. Therefore, the difference between the two groups is not related to the teachers’ different language background but rather concerned with the individual student’s listening ability. The findings of the current study have shown that the communication breakdown is an inevitable phenomenon in L2 learning. The analyzed data revealed that some causes occurred only with foreign teachers. In other words, the Korean teachers had an advantage in understanding the students’ utterance with the same mother tongue as the students. However, this does not mean that Korean teachers teach and communicate more effectively than foreign teachers. Adults learn L2 using general problem-solving abilities and general cognitive mechanism. Accordingly, communication breakdown can be an opportunity for adult learners to learn L2. It is concluded that both Korean and foreign teachers have their own positive instructional benefits to the students. Teachers should be aware of the adequate communication strategies to negotiate the meaning successfully in case of communication breakdowns.;이 연구는 의사소통 장애의 원인을 평가하고 한국인 강사와 외국인 강사 사이에 어떠한 차이가 있는지 비교하였으며, 구체적으로는 전화 수업을 통해 이루어졌다. 이 연구에는 12명의 성인 학습자와 2명의 한국인 강사, 2명의 필리핀 강사가 참여하였다. 10분짜리 수업 내용 80개를 녹취하여 총 800분으로 표집하였다. 녹취 내용은 원어민 수준의 영어 구사자가 1차례 검사한 뒤, 또 다른 원어민 수준의 영어 구사자가 다시 한 번 검사하였다. 먼저 의사소통 장애의 사례들을 확인하였고, 재확인 후, 스크립트로 전사하였다. 오디오 파일과 전사한 스크립트를 검토하여 분류 과정을 수행했다. 이 연구의 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 의사소통 장애의 주요 원인은 학습자의 언어 능력 미흡, 교사의 배경지식 부족, 기술적 문제들로 드러났다. 이중 가장 빈도가 높게 나타난 의사소통 장애 요인은 학습자의 제한된 해석 능력이었으며, 그 다음으로는 학습자의 제한된 어휘력으로 나타났다. 둘째, 한국인 강사 집단과 외국인 강사 집단에 대하여 의사소통 장애의 원인과 빈도를 비교해 본 결과, 두 집단 간 대다수의 장애 요인 별 빈도에 대해서는 유의한 차이를 보이지 않았다. 외국인 강사들은 학습자의 국가와 언어에 대한 배경지식이 부족하여 한국인 강사보다 더 많은 의사소통 장애를 일으켰다. 외국인 강사와 학습자 간의 문화적 차이가 불가피하게 의사소통 장애를 일으키는 것으로 사료된다. 또한 의미협상(negotiation of meaning)과정 후에도 문제가 해결되지 않은 사례도 있었다. 이 결과는 일부 의사소통 장애는 강사와 학습자 간의 배경지식의 차이 때문에 해결되지 못한다는 것을 보여준다. 외국인 강사의 경우에는 더 많은 기술적 문제가 발생하였다. 이것은 해외의 외국인 강사들로부터 한국까지의 인터넷 전화 접속이 원활하지 않기 때문이다. 학습자의 제한된 어휘력으로 인해 야기된 문제에서 유의한 차이를 보였다고 할지라도, 그 차이는 강사 집단의 언어 배경이라기보다는 개별 강사의 어휘 사용에 기인한 것으로 분석되었다. 학습자의 부정확한 발음에서도 유의한 차이가 나타났다. 학습자의 부정확한 발음을 이해하는 데는 외국인 강사들이 더 많은 어려움을 느끼고 있었다. 이 결과는 한국식 악센트로 발음되는 단어들을 이해하는 데 외국인 강사들이 더 많은 어려움을 느끼고 있음을 보여준다. 본 연구 결과, L2 학습에 있어서 의사소통 장애는 불가피한 현상임을 알 수 있었다. 분석 자료에 의하면 일부 장애 요인들은 외국인 강사에게서만 일어났다. 즉, 한국인 강사들은 동일한 모국어를 사용하는 학습자의 발화를 이해하는 데 이점을 가지고 있다. 하지만, 이것이 한국인 강사가 외국인 강사보다 효과적으로 교수하고 의사소통 한다는 것을 의미하지는 않는다. 성인들은 일반적 문제 해결 능력과 일반적 인지 기제를 사용해 L2를 학습한다. 따라서, 의사소통 장애는 성인 학습자들이 L2를 학습할 수 있는 기회가 될 수 있다. 결론적으로 한국인 강사와 외국인 강사 모두 학습자에 대하여 각각의 장점을 가지고 있다. 강사들은 의사소통 장애 시 성공적인 의미협상을 위해 적절한 의사소통 전략을 염두에 두어야 할 것이다.-
dc.description.tableofcontentsI. INTRODUCTION = 1 II. LITERATURE REVIEW = 5 A. Communication Breakdown = 5 B. L2 Learning via Telephone = 9 C. NESTs and Non-NESTs = 12 D. Previous Studies = 16 1. Communication Breakdown = 16 2. L2 Learning via Telephone = 20 3. NESTs and Non-NESTs = 22 III. METHODOLOGY = 25 A. Research Questions = 25 B. Participants = 26 C. Procedures = 28 D. Data Analysis = 30 E. Limitations of the Study = 31 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION = 32 A. The Cause Types of Communication Breakdown = 32 1. Teacher's Difficulties in Comprehending Students = 33 a. Students' Linguistic Knowledge Deficits = 34 (1) Inaccurate Pronunciation = 34 (2) Inappropriate Expression = 38 (3) Limited Fluency = 41 (4) Limited Discourse Competence = 43 b. Insufficient Background Knowledge = 46 c. Mishearing = 49 2. Students' Difficulties in Comprehending the Teacher = 51 a. Students' Linguistic Knowledge Deficits = 51 (1) Limited Decoding Ability = 52 (2) Limited Vocabulary = 60 b. Insufficient Background Knowledge = 64 3. Technical Issues = 66 B. Frequency of Communication Breakdown = 67 C. Analysis of Communication Breakdown Cause types = 74 V. CONCLUSION = 76 REFERENCES = 81 APPENDIX = 86 국문초록 = 94-
dc.formatapplication/pdf-
dc.format.extent685945 bytes-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisher이화여자대학교 대학원-
dc.titleAn Analytical Study on the Causes of Communication Breakdown in Telephone English Lessons-
dc.typeMaster's Thesis-
dc.title.translated전화영어수업에 있어서 의사소통 장애의 다양한 원인에 대한 분석적 연구-
dc.format.pageⅷ, 95 p.-
dc.identifier.thesisdegreeMaster-
dc.identifier.major대학원 영어교육학과-
dc.date.awarded2010. 2-
Appears in Collections:
일반대학원 > 영어교육학과 > Theses_Master
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

BROWSE