View : 972 Download: 0

Full metadata record

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.authorKUNGHAE SAMAWADEE-
dc.description.abstractThis paper examines the understanding and usage tendencies of Thai students learning the Korean language regarding the meaning, semantic function and strategy of negative questions. Existing education on questions in Thailand have focused on getting students familiarized with the forms of questions but have been less than efficient. This paper concentrates on the pragmatic traits of negative questions and delves into what elements should be incorporated in which methods in the teaching and learning environment. By providing grounds for such proposals, this paper hopes to contribute to furthering the existing education of questions. This paper consists of the following. Part I describes the purpose and the necessity of the study and reviews previous research. Previous research will be examined in two parts: research on the pragmatics acquirement of Thai students of the Korean language, and research on negative questions in the Korean language education. Through these previous research, the research questions were derived and the hypotheses set. In Part II, we will examine cross-cultural pragmatics, distinguishing the pragmatic traits between negative questions in the Korean and Thai languages, in order to provide the theoretical background. First, for cross-cultural pragmatics, the concepts of politeness and cultural universality as well as the concept of cross-cultural pragmatics itself will be examined. For the pragmatic traits of negative questions in the Korean and Thai languages, the paper categorizes the questions into directive, assertive and expressive speech acts. Negative questions in the Korean language are then divided into a total of seven categories including the semantic functions of ‘requesting’, ‘questioning’ and ‘ordering’ as directive speech acts, ‘assuming,’ ‘reminding’ and ‘inducing agreement’ as assertive speech acts, and ‘complaining’ as an expressive speech act. Also, based on the categorization of the speaker’s illocutionary intentions in previous research, we could classify six types of pragmatic strategies within the semantic meanings. Among these, the strategies of ‘offering choices,’ ‘passive assuming’ ‘recalling’ and ‘inducing agreement’ are those used to express politeness to the listener, while the strategies of ‘imposing’ and ‘stating forcefully’ are used to make listeners comply and feel pressured. For a more efficient comparative study, the paper also reviews the pragmatic traits of negative questions in the Thai language. In order to explain the difficulties Thai students experience when learning negative questions in the Korean language, the two languages were compared, with the focus on the similarities and differences of directive, assertive and expressive speech acts. Part III deals with the research method. According to the research process, before this study, two previous research were conducted and the revised results were incorporated into this study. The research methods in particular explain the research participants, research tools, analysis tools and methods. The research participants were divided into two groups: Thai students of the Korean language in their third and fourth year of college and a comparative group of Korean native speakers. Each group consists of 70 individuals, totaling 140 persons. As survey tools for the research, a survey questionnaire on the sematic function and strategy of negative questions was developed and used. There were two different types of survey questionnaire. The questionnaire containing comprehension questions focused on the participants’ understanding of the semantic functions of negative questions, which was the first research question. The questionnaire on usage aimed to find the participants’ tendencies in selecting negative questions in the Korean language according to strategies within the semantic functions. In order to analyze the difference between the two groups’ responses regarding how each group understand the semantic functions of the negative questions, statistical analysis was conducted using two-independent sample. Also, to find the difference on usage of negative questions according to strategy, a frequency analysis and a chi-square test was conducted, with their results closely analyzed. Part IV describes the study findings. The first research question examined whether there was a difference of understanding between Thai students and Korean native speakers on the pragmatic semantic function of negative questions. The findings pointed to significant differences in the understanding of the two groups on all semantic functions of the negative questions. The analysis was that in case of most semantic functions, the reason that Thai students shows a lower probability of selecting the indirect meaning was because they understood negative questions as questions of superficial meaning. For the second research question, we looked at whether the Thai student group had a good comprehension of the strategies of lessening the pressure or heightening the pressure on listeners with negative questions. For this, the paper compared the findings by strategy use of whether negative questions were chosen or not (excluding positive questions or positive/negative questions). As a result, in all pragmatic strategies, there was a difference in the probability of Thai students and Korean native speakers choosing negative questions. In case of strategies of lessening pressure on listeners, more than half of the Thai students chose negative questions but this rate was lower than that of Korean speakers. On the other hand, for all strategies of heightening pressure on listeners, students chose negative questions the most and the rate was quite high. In Part V, based on the findings concluded in Part IV, the results and significance of this paper was stated. This paper poses the question that education on negative questions that takes place in the Korean language education environment in Thailand only concentrates on the structure and basic meanings. In order to enhance of the efficiency of Korean language learning, the pragmatic semantic function and strategy of negative questions should be included in the education contents. This paper divided the pragmatic semantic function of negative questions into seven categories and classified six types of strategies of lessening or heightening the pressure or heightening the pressure on listeners. Such categorization would efficiently explain the semantic functions and strategies to students. In addition, the paper claims that reflecting in the education contents the fact that negative questions can be expressed differently according to the social and cultural differences between Korea and Thailand would reduce misunderstandings and conflicts by students in actual communication.;วิทยานิพนธ์ฉบับนี้มีวัตถุประสงค์ในการศึกษาเปรียบเทียบวัจนปฏิบัติศาสตร์ข้ามวัฒน ธรรม(Cross-Cultural Pragmatics) ในประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธ(Korean Nega tive Questions) ของนักศึกษาชาวไทยเอกภาษาเกาหลี เพื่อให้บรรลุวัตถุประสงค์งานวิจัย ชิ้นนี้ผู้วิจัยได้พัฒนาเครื่องมือแบบสอบถามMDCT(Multiple-choice Discourse Completion Task) และคำถามที่ใช้เพื่อการสัมภาษณ์ โดยมีรายละเอียดของงานวิจัยดังต่อไปนี้ บทที่หนึ่งกล่าวถึงวัตถุประสงค์และความจำเป็นของงานวิจัยฉบับนี้พร้อมทั้งได้ทบทวน วรรณกรรมที่เกี่ยวข้องกับงานวิจัยที่ผ่านมางานวิจัยที่พบในประเทศเกาหลีส่วนใหญ่มุ่งเน้นศึกษาเปรียบเทียบการใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธของนักศึกษาชาวจีนที่เรียนภาษาเกาหลีกับชาวเกาหลีแต่สำหรับนักศึกษาชาวไทยที่เรียนภาษาเกาหลียังไม่มีงานวิจัยปรากฏมาก่อนและในงานวิจัยเหล่านี้ไม่ได้ทดสอบความสามารถทางด้านการใช้แต่ทดสอบเพียงแค่ความเข้าใจเท่านั้น บทที่สองศึกษาเกี่ยวกับทฤษฎีที่นำมาประยุกต์ใช้กับงานวิจัยโดยแบ่งเนื้อหาออกเป็นสอง ส่วน ส่วนแรกศึกษาทฤษฏีวัจนปฏิบัติศาสตร์ข้ามวัฒนธรรม(Cross Cultural Pragmatics), ส่วนที่สองศึกษาการใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธของภาษาเกาหลีและภาษาไทย และได้นำลักษณะการใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธของทั้งสองภาษามาเปรียบเทียบเพื่อค้นหาลักษณะความเหมือนและความต่างของการใช้ประโยคคำถามซึ่งความแตกต่าง ของการใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธในภาษาเกาหลีและภาษาไทยอาจเป็นสาเหตุประการหนึ่งที่ทำให้นักศึกษาไทยใช้ประโยคคำถามไม่ได้หรือมีความบกพร่องในการใช้ประ โยคคำถามและทำให้เป็นอุปสรรคในการสื่อสารกับชาวเกาหลี บทที่สามกล่าวถึงกรอบปัญหางานวิจัยและวิธีดำเนินการวิจัยโดยตั้งคำถามงานวิจัยทั้ง หมดสองข้อ ดังต่อไปนี้ ๑.เปรียบเทียบความเข้าใจเกี่ยวกับความหมายวัจนกรรมทางอ้อม ของประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธระหว่างนักศึกษาชาวไทยและชาวเกาหลี,๒.เปรียบ เทียบการใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธในภาษาเกาหลีตามเจตนาของผู้พูดระหว่างนักศึกษาชาวไทยและชาวเกาหลีโดยแบ่งเจตนาของผู้พูดเป็นสองประเภท ประเภทที่หนึ่ง คือผู้พูดมีเจตนาใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธเพื่อแสดงถึงความสุภาพ, ประเภทที่ สองคือผู้พูดมีเจตนาใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธเพื่อแสดงถึงความไม่สุภาพเพื่อ ให้ได้ข้อมูลการใช้และความเข้าใจประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธในภาษาเกาหลีผู้วิจัยทำชุดแบบสอบถาม MDCTขึ้นมาสองฉบับดังต่อไปนี้ ชุดแรกคือแบบทดสอบความเข้าใจ, ชุดที่สองคือแบบทดสอบการใช้จากนั้นผู้วิจัยแบ่งกลุ่มประชากรออกเป็นสองกลุ่มคือ นักศึก ษาชาวไทยและชาวเกาหลี กลุ่มละ ๗๐ คน รวมทั้งสิ้น ๑๔๐ คน ให้ทั้งสองกลุ่มทำแบบทด สอบการใช้และแบบทดสอบความเข้าใจโดยผู้วิจัยได้เก็บรวบรวมแบบสอบถามและวิเคราะห์ผลการวิจัยต่อไป บทที่สี่ผลการวิเคราะห์ข้อมูลผู้วิจัยแสดงผลการวิเคราะห์ข้อมูลโดยแจกแจงผลที่ได้ออกมาโดยสรุปตามข้อกรอบปัญหางานวิจัยที่กล่าวในบทที่สามทั้งนี้ได้นำข้อมูลดังกล่าวมาวิเคราะห์พร้อมทั้งแสดงความคิดเห็น รายละเอียดผลการศึกษาสามารถสรุปได้ดังนี้ ๑. ผู้วิจัยแบ่งความหมายวัจนกรรมทางอ้อมของประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธเป็น ๗ ประเภท ได้แก่ ถามเพื่อชักชวน, ถามเพื่อขอร้อง, ถามเพื่อสั่ง, ถามเพื่อคาดคะเน, ถามเพื่อ ทบทวนความจำ, ถามเพื่อขอความเห็นด้วย, ถามเพื่อแสดงความไม่พอใจ โดยการจัดลำดับ ความเข้าใจของนักศึกษาที่มีต่อความหมายวัจนกรรมทางอ้อมของประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธนักศึกษาไทยมีความเข้าใจการถามเพื่อแสดงความไม่พอใจมากที่สุด และรองลง มาคือ ถามเพื่อทบทวนความจำ, ถามเพื่อขอร้อง,ถามเพื่อขอความเห็นด้วย,ถามเพื่อชักชวน และถามเพื่อสั่งตามลำดับ ในบรรดาความหมายวัจนกรรมทางอ้อมของประโยคคำถามที่มี เนื้อความปฏิเสธนักศึกษาไทยมีความเข้าใจการถามเพื่อแสดงความไม่พอใจมากที่สุดเนื่อง จากมีการใช้ความหมายลักษณะเดียวกันนี้ในภาษาแม่ส่วนความหมายวัจนกรรมทางอ้อม อื่นๆนักศึกษาไทยเข้าใจว่าเป็นประโยคคำถามที่ต้องการคำตอบ ๒.ผู้วิจัยแบ่งเจตนาของการใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธเป็น ๒ ประเภทคือผู้พูดมี เจตนาใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธเพื่อแสดงถึงความสุภาพ โดยแยกออกเป็น (๑) เจตนาให้ทางเลือกแก่ผู้ฟัง, (๒) เจตนาคาดเดาความเป็นไปได้ที่จะไม่เป็นไปตามที่คาดคะเน, (๓) เจตนาทบทวนให้ผู้ฟังระลึกถึงเหตุการณ์ในอดีต, (๔) เจตนาให้ผู้ฟังเห็นด้วยกันกับผู้พูด และผู้พูดมีเจตนาใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธเพื่อแสดงถึงความไม่สุภาพ โดยแยกออกเป็น (๑) เจตนาบังคับให้ผู้ฟังกระทำในสิ่งที่ผู้พูดต้องการ, (๒), เจตนาประชดประชันผู้ฟัง นักศึกษาไทยใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธทั้งในกรณีที่ แสดงถึงความสุภาพและไม่สุภาพ ในกรณีที่แสดงถึงความสุภาพนักศึกษาไทยเลือกใช้ประ โยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธได้น้อยกว่าคนเกาหลี แต่ในกรณีที่แสดงถึงความไม่สุภาพ นักศึกษาไทยเลือกใช้ประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธได้ใกล้เคียงกับคนเกาหลีมากที่สุด บทที่ห้ากล่าวถึงบทสรุปของงานวิจัยและประโยชน์ที่คาดว่าจะได้รับจากงานวิจัยชิ้นนี้ นอกจากนี้ผู้วิจัยเสนอแนวทางการสอนประโยคคำถามที่มีเนื้อความปฏิเสธในภาษาเกาหลี;본 연구는 태국인 한국어 학습자를 대상으로 하여 부정 의문문의 의미 기능 및 전략에 대한 이해와 사용 양상을 살펴보고자 하였다. 기존 태국 내 의문문 교육은 의문문의 형태를 익히는 것에 초점이 맞추어져 있어 교육적 효율성이 높지 않았다. 본 연구는 부정 의문문의 화용적 특징에 대한 내용으로, 교수  학습 현장에서 무엇을 어떻게 적용할지에 대한 근거를 마련해 기존 의문문 교육의 효율성을 높이는 데 기여할 것이다. 본 연구의 구성은 다음과 같다. I장에서는 연구의 목적과 필요성을 서술하고 선행 연구를 검토하였다. 선행 연구는 태국인 한국어 학습자의 화용론 습득 연구와 한국어 교육에서의 한국어 부정 의문문 연구로 나누어 살펴보았다. 그리고 선행 연구를 통해 연구 문제를 도출하고 가설을 설정하였다. II장에서는 비교문화적 화용론을 검토하고, 한국어와 태국어 부정 의문문의 화용적 특징을 구분하여 관찰함으로써 이론적 배경을 마련하였다. 먼저 비교문화적 화용론에서는 공손성과 문화 보편성, 비교문화적 화용론의 개념을 정리하였다. 그리고 한국어 및 태국어 부정 의문문의 화용적 특징에서는 한국어와 태국어 부정 의문문을 지시화행, 단언화행, 정표화행으로 분류해 살펴보았다. 한국어 부정 의문문의 지시화행은 ‘청유, 요청, 명령’ 의미 기능, 단언화행은 ‘추정, 상기, 동의 유도’ 의미 기능, 정표화행은 ‘불평’ 의미 기능으로 총 일곱 가지로 분류하였다. 또한 선행 연구들에서 분류한 화자의 발화 의도를 참고하여 여섯 가지로 유형화하였다. 이 중 ‘선택권 주기, 소극적으로 추정하기, 기억을 떠올리게 하기, 동의 유도하기’ 발화 의도들은 청자에게 공손함을 드러내기 위해 사용하는 전략이고, ‘강요하기, (강력하게) 주장하기’ 발화 의도들은 청자에게 강제성과 부담감을 주기 위해 사용하는 전략이다. 좀 더 효과적인 비교 연구를 위해 태국어 부정 의문문의 화용적 특징도 함께 살펴보았다. 태국인 한국어 학습자들이 부정 의문문을 학습할 때 어려운 점을 밝히기 위해서 두 언어를 비교하여 지시화행, 단언화행, 정표화행을 중심으로 공통점과 차이점을 살펴보았다. III장은 연구 방법에 대한 내용이다. 연구 절차에 따라 본 실험에 앞서 1, 2차 예비 실험을 실시하였고, 수정 사항을 반영하여 본 실험을 진행하였다. 연구 방법에서는 구체적으로 연구 참여자, 연구 도구, 분석 도구, 분석 방법에 대해 서술하였다. 본 실험의 참여자는 대학교 3, 4학년 태국인 한국어 학습자와 비교 집단으로서의 한국인 모어 화자, 총 두 집단으로 구성되며 집단별로 각 70명씩 모두 140명이다. 연구를 위한 설문 도구로는 부정 의문문의 의미 기능 및 전략 설문지를 개발하여 사용하였고 설문지는 총 2가지 유형으로 구성하였다. 이해 문항 설문지는 ‘연구 문제 1’인 부정 의문문의 의미 기능에 대한 이해를 묻는 것이었고 사용 문항 설문지는 ‘연구 문제 2’인 부정 의문문의 의미 기능 내 전략에 따른 한국어 부정 의문문 사용 양상을 알아보는 것이었다. 부정 의문문의 의미 기능에 대한 이해의 정도에 있어서 집단별 응답 차이를 분석하기 위해 t-검정(two-independent sample)을 사용하여 통계 분석을 실시하였다. 그리고 전략에 따른 부정 의문문의 사용 차이를 알아보기 위해 빈도 분석(frequency analysis), 카이제곱검정(chi-square test)을 실시하였고 해당 결과에 대해 심층적으로 분석하였다. IV장에서는 연구 결과에 대해 기술하였다. ‘연구 문제 1’에서는 태국인 학습자와 한국인 모어 화자들이 부정 의문문의 화용적 의미 기능에 대하여 이해 수준에서 차이를 보이는지 알아보았다. 그 결과, 부정 의문문에 대한 두 집단 간의 이해 정도는 모든 의미 기능에서 유의미한 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 대부분의 의미 기능에서 태국인 학습자들이 간접적인 의미를 선택하는 비율이 낮은 이유는 부정 의문문을 표면적인 의미인 질문으로 이해했기 때문으로 분석하였다. ‘연구 문제 2’에서는 태국인 학습자 집단이 부정 의문문의 청자 부담 약화 전략과 청자 부담 강화 전략을 잘 인식하고 있는지 알아보았다. 이를 위해 각 사용 전략 별로 부정 의문문 선택과 비선택(긍정 의문문, 긍정/부정 의문문 이외)의 결과를 비교해 보았다. 연구 결과, 모든 화용적 전략에서 태국인 학습자와 한국인 모어 화자가 부정 의문문을 선택한 비율에 차이가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 청자의 부담을 약화시키는 전략의 경우, 태국인 학습자의 절반 이상이 부정 의문문을 선택하였지만 선택 비율을 비교해 보면 한국인 모어 화자에 미치지 못함을 알 수 있었다. 반면, 청자의 부담을 강화시키는 모든 전략에서는 학습자들이 부정 의문문을 가장 많이 선택하였고 그 비율 또한 높은 수준이다. V장에서는 IV장에서 도출된 결과를 바탕으로 본 연구의 결과와 의의를 기술하였다. 본 연구는 태국의 한국어 교육 현장에서 이루어지는 부정 의문문 교육 내용이 구조와 기본적인 의미로만 이루어진다는 점에 대해 문제를 제기하고, 한국어 학습의 효율성을 높이기 위해 부정 의문문의 화용적 의미 기능, 전략을 교육 내용으로 도입해야 한다고 본다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 부정 의문문의 화용적 의미 기능을 7가지로, 화자의 의도에 따른 청자 부담 약화 혹은 강화 전략을 6가지로 분류하여 연구하였다. 이러한 분류방식을 적용하면 학습자들에게 화용적 의미 기능과 전략에 대해 효과적으로 설명할 수 있다. 더불어 한국과 태국의 사회, 문화적인 차이에 따라 부정 의문문 표현 방식이 다르게 나타난다는 사실을 교육 내용에 반영하면 실제 의사소통에서 학습자들의 오해와 갈등을 줄일 수 있을 것이다.-
dc.description.tableofcontentsⅠ. 서론 1 A. 연구의 목적 및 필요성 1 B. 연구 대상 5 C. 선행 연구 검토 10 1. 태국인 한국어 학습자의 화용 습득 연구 10 2. 한국어 교육에서의 한국어 부정 의문문 연구 14 D. 연구 문제 및 가설 18 II. 이론적 배경 23 A. 공손성과 비교문화적 화용론 23 1. 공손성 23 2. 비교문화적 화용론 28 B. 한국어와 태국어 부정 의문문의 화용적 특징 33 1. 한국어 부정 의문문의 화용적 의미 기능 33 2. 태국어 부정 의문문의 화용적 의미 기능 69 3. 한국어와 태국어 부정 의문문의 화용적 의미 기능 비교 82 Ⅲ. 연구 방법 88 A. 연구 절차 88 B. 예비 실험 92 1. 연구 참여자 92 2. 자료 수집 도구 개발 및 수정 방안 93 C. 본 실험 95 1. 연구 참여자 95 2. 자료 수집 도구 96 3. 자료 분석 방법 105 Ⅳ. 연구 결과 및 논의 107 A. 태국인 학습자의 한국어 부정 의문문 이해 107 1. 청유의 화용적 의미 기능 109 2. 요청의 화용적 의미 기능 114 3. 명령의 화용적 의미 기능 118 4. 추정의 화용적 의미 기능 123 5. 상기의 화용적 의미 기능 127 6. 동의 유도의 화용적 의미 기능 131 7. 불평의 화용적 의미 기능 135 B. 태국인 학습자의 한국어 부정 의문문 사용 141 1. 청자 부담 약화 전략 146 2. 청자 부담 강화 전략 195 C. 소결론 214 Ⅴ. 결론 218 A. 연구 결과 요약 219 B. 연구 의의 및 제언 223 참고문헌 227 부록 1. 이해 능력 설문지 236 부록 2. 사용 능력 설문지 244 ABSTRACT 260 태국어 논문 초록 264-
dc.format.extent3504613 bytes-
dc.publisher이화여자대학교 국제대학원-
dc.title비교문화적 화용론의 관점에서 본 태국인 학습자의 한국어 부정 의문문 습득 연구-
dc.typeDoctoral Thesis-
dc.title.translatedA study on acquisition of negative questions in the Korean language by Thai learners from a perspective of cross-cultural pragmatics-
dc.creator.othernameKUNGHAE SAMAWADEE-
dc.format.pagex, 266 p.-
dc.identifier.major국제대학원 한국학과-
Appears in Collections:
국제대학원 > 한국학과 > Theses_Ph.D
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.