Title

韓籍學生母語中韓漢字量詞對於漢字量詞學習之影響研究

Translated Titles

A Study on the Influence of Sino-Korean Measure Words of Korean Learners in Learning Chinese Measure Words.

DOI

10.6840/cycu201400570

Authors

嚴巧伃

Key Words

韓漢字量詞 ; 量詞 ; 韓籍學習者 ; 母語遷移 ; language transfer ; Korean student ; measure word ; Sino-korean measure word

PublicationName

中原大學應用華語文研究所學位論文

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

2014年

Academic Degree Category

碩士

Advisor

廖宜瑤

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

自古以來,韓語就受到漢語文化的影響,且影響甚深,而形成至今韓語裡有大量受到漢字影響的漢字詞。這些受到漢字影響的詞彙中有一部分是量詞,而稱之為韓漢字量詞,漢語量詞與韓漢字量詞雖然有著同源的關係,且在讀音上也近似,然而一些韓漢字量詞卻因經歷了時代以及環境上的演變產生了不同的用法與意義。經由以上的原因,母語的影響可能造成韓籍學習者在學習漢語量詞上遇到一些困難。 為了瞭解韓漢字量詞對於韓籍學習者在學習上的影響,本文以《漢語水平詞彙與等級大綱》內的量詞為選取範圍,選出46個量詞進行對比分析,得出漢語與韓漢字詞的分類可分為「漢韓意義相同」、「漢韓意義漢廣韓狹」、「漢韓意義漢狹韓廣」、「漢韓部分同義」以及「漢韓意義不同」五類,再以分類為依據發展本文的調查問卷,本文問卷發放的對象為韓國中文系二年級學生。 分析結果顯示,各類別的答對率由高至低的排序為:較簡單的是漢韓同義;次簡單的是漢韓意義部分相同;而後是漢韓意義不同;次難的是漢狹韓廣;而最難的是漢廣韓狹此類別。根據每類的分析結果顯示,漢韓意義相同的量詞因為在漢語以及韓漢字量詞的義項上為對等的關係,所以可以為學習者帶來正遷移的效果;而對於學習者而言最難的是漢廣韓狹此類,原因在於漢廣韓狹此類的義項對比上,意義不對等,又漢語較韓語多,所以容易造成學習者的混淆。

English Abstract

Since Korea has been influenced by Chinese culture for hundreds of years, there are a great number of Korean words borrowed from ancient Chinese language. Some of these characters are measure words. We called them Sino-Korean measure words. Through the change of time and environment, some Chinese measured words and Sino-Korean measure words still have common characteristics but differ in terms of usage, while other words used in either language have developed totally different meanings. For these reasons, Korean students may make errors influenced by their native language while studying Chinese measure words. In order to understand the influences caused by Sino-Korean measure words in Korean tudents, there were 46 chinese measure words selected from the outline of HSK Vocabulary according to their equivelent Sino-Korean measure words. These words then were divided into five categories entitled exact matches, homomorphic with broader meaning in Chinese, homomorphic with broader meaning in Korean, partially match, and mismatch. Based on these five categories, a test was developed and applied to 41 sophomre Korean students in Chinese department in Korea. The result shows that the correctness of the participants’ answers rated from high to low are exact matches , partial match, mismatch, homomorphic with broader meaning in Korean, and homomorphic with broader meaning in Chinese respectively. The categories of exact match could bring positive transfer. The homomorphic with broader meaning in Chinese is the most difficult one for the Chinese measure words in this category do not have correspondence Sino-Korean meanings and thus is confusing to Korean students.

Topic Category 人文學 > 語言學
人文學 > 中國文學
人文與教育學院 > 應用華語文研究所
Reference
  1. 方麗娜(2004)。華語詞彙的認知途徑語教學策略研究。高雄師大學報,17,139-158。
    連結:
  2. 王建勤(2006)。漢語作為第二語言的學習者習得過程研究。北京:商務印書館。
    連結:
  3. 加納剛(2010)。日籍學習者學習漢語詞彙之難點-中日同型詞使用偏誤研究。臺北市:國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  4. 田意民、曾志朗、洪蘭(2002)。漢語分類時的語義與認知基礎:功能語法觀點。Language and Linguistics, 3(1),101-132.
    連結:
  5. 蔡愷瑜(2010)。由對比與難度等級探討日籍學習者漢語分類詞之使用。臺北市:國立臺灣師範大學華語文教學研究所碩士論文。
    連結:
  6. Brown, H. D. (2006). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. New York : Pearson.
    連結:
  7. Bull, S.(1995). Handling Native and Non-Native Language Transfer in CALL: Theory and Practice. R. Wakely, A. Barker, D. Frier, P. Graves, P. Suleiman (Eds.), Language teaching and learning in higher education: issues and perspectives, CILT, London , pp. 97–108.
    連結:
  8. Corder, S. (1978b). Language distance and the magnitude of the learning task. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 2(1), 27-36.
    連結:
  9. Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    連結:
  10. Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    連結:
  11. Gass. S. (1983). The Development of L2 Intuitions. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 273-291.
    連結:
  12. Hossein Tavakoli(2012). A dictionary of language Acquisition, A comprehensive overview of key Terms in first and second language acquisition. Iran: Rahnama.
    連結:
  13. Kellerman, E. (1977). Towards a characterization of the strategy of transfer in second language acquisition, L.S.B, 2(1), 58-146
    連結:
  14. Krashen, Stephen. and Tracy Terrell.(1983). The Natural Approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. Oxford: Pergamon.
    連結:
  15. Larsen-Freeman, D., & Long, M. H. (1991). An introduction to second language acquisition Research. London: Longman.
    連結:
  16. Oller, J. W., & S. M. Ziahosseiny (1970). The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis and Spelling Errors. Language Learning, 20, 183-189.
    連結:
  17. Pica, T. (1994)。Questions From the Language Classroom: Research Perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 49-79.
    連結:
  18. Stern, H H (1992). Issues and Options in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    連結:
  19. Wardhaugh, R. (1970). The Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly 4(2): 123–130.
    連結:
  20. 추청(2013)。중국인 한국어 학습자를 위한 한국어 분류사 연구。동국대학교 대학원국어국문학과
    連結:
  21. 方麗娜(2003)。漢語詞彙教學研究-量詞篇。中學教育學報,10,105-132。
  22. 王力(1980)。漢語史稿。北京:中華書局。
  23. 王文宇(1999)。語言遷移現象研究的回顧與思考。外語教學,20(1),6-12。
  24. 王初明(1990)。應用心理語言學-外語學習心理研究。湖南:湖南教育出版社。
  25. 王曉霞(2007)。韓國語漢字詞的傳承與變義特點小議。北京:中央民族大學中國少數民族語言文學院碩士論文。
  26. 田芳(2009)。從韓國文化危機看漢字對韓國的影響。中國商界,6,353-354。
  27. 呂叔湘(2007)。現代漢語八百詞(增訂版)。中國:中國社會科學出版社。
  28. 何杰(2001)。現代漢語量詞研究(修訂版)。北京:民族出版社。
  29. 房文娣(2011)。高中英語寫作母語負遷移問題研究。吉林:東北師範大學
  30. 房文娣(2011)。高中英語寫作中母語負遷移研究。吉林:東北師範大學學科教學碩士論文。
  31. 金福芬、陳國華(2002)。漢語量詞的語法化。清華大學學報,1(17),8-14。
  32. 孟柱億(2008)。韓國漢語教育的現狀與未來。雲南師範大學學報,6(2),30-36。
  33. 邵黨喜(2003)。語言遷移:從型為主義框架到認知心理學框架。西安電子科技大學學報(社會科學版),13(1),108-111。
  34. 吳慧(2009)。從中韓量詞的對比談對韓漢語量詞教學。海外華文教育,4,43-48。
  35. 俞理明(2004)。語言遷移與二語習得-回顧、反思和研究。上海:上海外語教育出版社。
  36. 馬麗娣(2008)語言遷移理論發展語第二語言習得關係研究。US-China Foreign Language, 6(12), 15-22.
  37. 徐睿(2012)。母語正遷移對二語習得的影響研究。中國電力教育,26,152-153。
  38. 郭虹霞(2011)。二語詞彙習得中跨語言遷移的語言類型分析。外語學刊,2,114-117。
  39. 盛炎(1990)。語言教學原理。重慶:重慶出版社。
  40. 許余龍(2005)。對比語言學概論。上海:上海外語教育出版社。
  41. 彭媛(2010)。漢語量詞的語意演變研究。西南石油大學學報(社會科學版),3(2),92-96。
  42. 趙大漢(2007)。漢語量詞與韓國語單位名詞的語義對比研究。上海:復旦大學現代漢語語言文字學碩士學位論文。
  43. 樊中元(2009)。談量詞教學中的語義層次。柳州職業技術學院學報,9(2),130-133。
  44. 劉增慧(2012)。韓漢個體量詞對比。佳木斯教育學院學報,5,318-319。
  45. Aijuan, L.(2010). On Pragmatic “Borrowing Transfer”: Evidence from Chinese EFL Learner’s Compliment Response Behavior. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics .33(4),26-44.
  46. Carl, J. (1980). Contrastive Analysis. London and New York : Longman.
  47. Faerch, C., & Kasper, G. (1987). Introspection in second language research. Clevedon, Avon, England,Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
  48. Odlin, T. (1989): Language transfer: cross-linguistic influence in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  49. 李恩敬(1999)。中國語量詞硏究-以韓國語為比較中心。韓國:梨花女子大學教育大學院碩士論文。
  50. 鄭恩惠(1999)。韓中漢字詞之異質化研究。韓國︰梨花女子大學中文教學大學院碩士論文。
  51. 姜芳(2010)。한•중 분류사의 기능과 의미 대조 연구。전북대학교대학원 국어국문학과.
  52. 신미현(2009)。中國語 量詞와 韓國語 單位名詞의對比硏究。한양대학교 교육대학원 중국어교육전공
  53. 오상언(2010)。한•중 분류사 비교 연구-동형 한자어 분류사를 중심으로。 경희대학교 대학원 국어국문학과.
  54. 정상희(2010)。중국어 양사와 한국어 단위명사의 용법 대조 연구-HSK 어휘를 중심으로。단국대학교대학원 중어중문학과 중국어학전공.
  55. 진봉매(2010)。한•중 분류사 및 수량표현구의대비 연구。아주대학교대학원 국어국문학과
  56. Wang Su Yao(2013)。한•중 분류사의 대조와교육 방안 연구。전남대학교대학원 국어교육학과