http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
개별검색 DB통합검색이 안되는 DB는 DB아이콘을 클릭하여 이용하실 수 있습니다.
통계정보 및 조사
예술 / 패션
<해외전자자료 이용권한 안내>
- 이용 대상 : RISS의 모든 해외전자자료는 교수, 강사, 대학(원)생, 연구원, 대학직원에 한하여(로그인 필수) 이용 가능
- 구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색 및 등록된 대학IP 대역 내에서 24시간 무료 이용
- 미구독대학 소속 이용자: RISS 해외전자자료 통합검색을 통한 오후 4시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용
※ 단, EBSCO ASC/BSC(오후 5시~익일 오전 9시 무료 이용)
This paper aims to give a suggestion as to how to design various text types in a Korean reading textbook. To develope proficiency in Korean language, various texts which are used in the same discourse community must also be adapted in the Korean reading education field as a foreign language. In this reason first, Brinker and Ko-yungkeun's textlinguistics theories, which are applicable to the Korean reading education field will be discussed. And then secondly, based on these theories, I will further classify the texts of 6 Korean reading textbooks (levels 1 to 6 published by Yonsei University Press) into the six text types and then mention the necessity for text types in Korean reading texts. Lastly, I attempt to present various texts in view of diversity of text types from levels 1 to 6. This paper should hopefully be a little contribution for teaching Korean reading classes effectively and construction Korean reading text books as a syllabus.
This study aims at setting the hierarchy of difficulty of the 7 Korean monophthongs for Mongolian learners of Korean according to Prator's theory based on the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. In addition to that, it will be shown that the difficulties and errors for Mongolian learners of Korean as a second or foreign language proceed directly from this hierarchy of difficulty. This study began by looking at the speeches of 60 Mongolians for Mongolian monophthongs; data were investigated and analyzed into formant frequencies F1 and F2 of each vowel. Then, the 7 Korean monophthongs were compared with the resultant Mongolian formant values and are assigned to 3 levels, ‘same', ‘similar' or ‘different sound'. The findings in assessing the differences of the 8 nearest equivalents of Korean and Mongolian vowels are as follows: First, Korean /a/ and /?/ turned out as a ‘same sound' with their counterparts, Mongolian /a/ and /?/. Second, Korean /i/, /e/, /o/, /u/ turned out as a ‘similar sound' with each their Mongolian counterparts /i/, /e/, /o/, /u/. Third, Korean /?/ which is nearest to Mongolian /i/ in terms of phonetic features seriously differs from it and is thus assigned to ‘different sound'. And lastly, Mongolian /?/ turned out as a ‘different sound' with its nearest counterpart, Korean /u/. Based on these findings the hierarchy of difficulty was constructed. Firstly, 4 Korean monophthongs /a/, /?/, /i/, /e/ would be Level 0(Transfer); they would be transferred positively from their Mongolian counterparts when Mongolians learn Korean. Secondly, Korean /o/, /u/ would be Level 5(Split); they would require the Mongolian learner to make a new distinction and cause interference in learning the Korean language because Mongolian /o/, /u/ each have 2 similar counterpart sounds; Korean /o, u/, /u, o/. Thirdly, Korean /?/ which is not in the Mongolian vowel system will be Level 4(Overdifferentiation); the new vowel /?;/ which bears little similarity to Mongolian /i/, must be learned entirely anew and will cause much difficulty for Mongolian learners in speaking and writing Korean. And lastly, Mongolian /?/ will be Level 2(Underdifferentiation); it is absent in the Korean language and doesn't cause interference in learning Korean as long as Mongolian learners avoid using it.
This study aims to determine which monophthongs among the seven basic monophthongs of the Korean language could be the most easily proved as errors by Mongolian learners of Korean as a second language. As previously explored by Yijoongjin (2010), in comparison with other vowels it is assumed that the vowels /i/, /o/, /u/ frequently offer the most difficulty. In order to determine and examine the difficulties encountered with these vowels, this study makes use of both listening and pronunciation assessments. The test subjects for this investigation totaled consisted of fifteen Korean language learners drawn from the beginning, intermediate and advanced levels and, concerning, the listening test, it was conducted with combinations of words which possessed no meaning. This work not only illuminates errors but reveals the error frequency of learners at various levels and the correlation between learners` listening abilities and their competency in pronunciation. At present it would be difficult to find a sample that would exemplify the same relationship between the listening and pronunciation proficiency as this subjects included in this work and, as such, however little, it is believed that this assessment will contribute to instruction of Korean as a foreign language.