Date post: | 14-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | tamia-boddy |
View: | 218 times |
Download: | 3 times |
University of Hawai’i at ManoaHye Seung Lee
Perception and Production of com of KFL Students
1. Korean com is commonly characterized as a contracted form of an adverb of degree cokum which means ‘a little’ or ‘a few’ in English.
2. Com as a discourse marker (DM) is widely known as a politeness marker with a hedging function to mitigate face threatening acts.
3. The use of com is closely related to communication strategies in Korean society.
4. Only a few studies have been done from the perspective of L2 education (Ceng, 2005; Se, 2006).
5. Com appears often in Korean textbooks even without any appropriate explanations of its function and use.
6. “pragmatic fossilization”: “the phenomenon by which a non-native speaker systematically uses certain forms inappropriately at the pragmatic level of communication” (Romero Trillo, 2002, p. 770).
Introduction
1. Reduction of illocutionary force1.1 Semantic qualifier1.2 Speech act qualifier1.3 (Fixed expressions)
2. Filler2.1 Hesitation2.2 Searching for words2.3 Filled pause
3. Increase of illocutionary force3.1 Requesting marker3.2 (Attention getter)
Pragmatics of com
1. Negative politeness (Brown and Levinson, 1978)a. It minimizes the imposition that the FTA effects. b. Linguistic devices such as hedges on illocutionary force are used to
realize it. 2. Hedge
c. “A ‘hedge’ is a particle, word, or phrase that modifies the degree of membership of a predicate or noun phrase in a set; it says of that membership that is partial, or true only in certain respects, or that it is more true and complete than perhaps might be expected” (Brown & Levinson, 1978, p.145)
d. “linguistic expressions which weaken the illocutionary force of a statement” (Watts, 2003, p.169)
e. It is a cross-linguistic tendency that diminutives qualify illocutionary force (Jurafsky, 1996).
Reduction of Illocutionary Force
3. Com as a hedgea. Sohn (1985, 1999): integral part of indirect requestb. Koo (2004)
• mitigation is one of the most important politeness strategies. • com is the most frequent expression used for mitigation. • 58.96% of the politeness strategies were accomplished by the three
most frequent expressions: ci an-h-ta ‘not be’, com, kes kathta ‘seem, appear’.
c. Semantic qualifier and speech act qualifier
Reduction of Illocutionary Force (cont’d)
LessonNumber of
comAdverb‘a little’
Discourse marker
Others in requests
‘please’mitigation
L3 3 2 1
L4 7 6 1
L5 4 4
L6 2 2
L7 7 1 4 2
L8 4 1 3
L9 7 1 6
L10 2 1 1
L11 32 28 4
L12 5 4 1
L13 1 1
L14 16 13 3
L15 3 1 2
total 93 2 (2.2%) 53 (57.0%) 36 (38.7%) 2 (2.2%)
Com in KLEAR Beginning 1 and 2
Purpose1. To identify the overall competence of Korean DMs among KFL students2. To draw attention to the lack of education of DMs and encourage its
integration into the Korean language education
Research questions 3. Do KFL students perceive com as politeness marker in terms of its use
and location?4. Do KFL students produce com in requesting sentences?5. Is there difference between HLs and NHLs in their perception and
production?
Perception and Production of com of KFL students
Participants1. 10 native Korean speakers, from Seoul, in their 30s, as the
baseline data2. A total of 84 KOR201 students from fall 2008 to present (43
HL & 41 NHL)3. Qualification of a HL
a. One or both parents are Korean who speak the Korean language with the student.
b. One or more of the grandparents are Korean who speak the Korean language and have lived with the student at any point of the student’s life.
Test Methods
1. Fill in the blank speech bubbles2. Total 7 blank bubbles (5 related to requesting & 2 distracters)
Materials-Production Test-
식당에서
네 , 그런데 목이 말라요 . 물 마시고 싶어요 .
피자가 맛있네요
그래요 ?
여기요 !
네 , 손님
네 , 알겠습니다 .
고맙습니다
1. 20 multiple-choice questions 2. 5 questions related to the use of com 3. 5 questions related to the location of com 4. 10 distracters
Materials -Perception Test-
1. It is winter time. You are at the classroom. Somebody came in but left the door open. How would you ask the person to close the door?
①.문 좀 닫아 주세요 .
②.문 닫아 주세요 .
2. Your roommate is watching TV and the sound is too loud. How would you ask your roommate to lower the volume?
①.좀 텔레비전 볼륨 낮춰 줄래요 ?
②.텔레비전 볼륨 낮춰 줄래요 ?
Perception Test Sample
Use of com
Location of com
Number of correct answers
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5Average
Score% Correct
HL (n=43) 42 (97.7%) 35 (81.4%) 33 (76.7%) 32 (74.4%) 27 (62.8%) 33.8 78.6%
NHL (n=41) 34 (82.9%) 32 (78.0%) 26 (63.4%) 31 (75.6%) 21 (51.2%) 28.8 70.2%
Perception Test
Table 1. The number of correct responses for the perception test on the use of com
Number of correct answers
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5Average
Score% Correct
HL (n=43) 34 (79.1%) 39 (90.7%) 22 (51.2%) 24 (55.8%) 30 (69.8%) 29.8 69.3%
NHL (n=41) 36 (87.8%) 37 (90.2%) 21 (51.2%) 22 (53.7%) 34 (82.9%) 30.0 73.2%
Table 2. The number of correct responses for the perception test on the location of com
HL NHL0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
By Student TypeUsage Location
Usage Location0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
By Type of QuestionHL NHL
Average Correct Com Perception
Use
Use
Number of com (per student*)
Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Total
NS (n=10) 8 (0.8) 12 (1.2) 6 (0.6) 10 (1.0) 9 (0.9) 45 (0.9)
HL (n=43) 22 (0.51) 15 (0.35) 10 (0.23) 11 (0.26) 10 (0.23) 68 (0.32)
NHL (n=41) 10 (0.24) 11 (0.27) 5 (0.12) 2 (0.05) 7 (0.17) 35 (0.17)
Production Test
Table 3. The number of com on the production test
* The proportion of occurrences of com per student.
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q50.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Average Com Production Per Student
Native Speaker Heritage Non Heritage
Production Test
Table 4. The number of correct usage of com on the production test
Number of com (per student)
Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Total Error Rate*
NS (n=10) 8 (0.8) 12 (1.2) 6 (0.6) 10 (1) 9 (0.9) 45 (0.9) 0%
HL (n=43) 22 (0.51) 14 (0.33) 9 (0.21) 10 (0.23) 9 (0.21) 64 (0.30) 5.88%
NHL (n=41) 9 (0.22) 10 (0.24) 4 (0.1) 2 (0.05) 6 (0.15) 31 (0.15) 12.00%
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q50.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
Avg. Correct Com Production Per Student
Native Speaker Heritage Non Heritage
1. Result1. Perception test
1) Both HLs and NHLs perceived the politeness function of com and its proper location very well.
2) There were little differences in terms of the correct recognition of com between HLs and NHLs.
2. Production test1) Both HLs and NHLs had a low rate of producing com, compared to
NSs.2) HLs’ production rate is twice that of the NHLs’, but only 1/3 that of
the NSs’.
Discussion
2. Attribution
High rate of peception The amount of exposure to com’s frequent presence in requests seems to allow them to recognize the function and syntax. (e.g. family, Korean community, textbook, teacher, etc.)
Low rate of production1) There is no formal instruction about how to use com.
• HLs used incorrect spellings of com in the correct locations. (e.g. 즘 , 점 , 쫌 )
• HLs used com in the wrong loccation. (e.g. 문을 닫을 좀 주세요 .)2) KFL students don’t have the chance to practice the use of com in the classroom.
• HLs know specific expressions better than NHLs. (e.g. 물 좀 주세요 .)
Discussion (cont’d)
Gap
1. Reducing illocutionary force can be a useful strategy of politeness that is critical in achieving communicative competence for language learner.
2. In order to bridge the gap between students’ perception and production, com as a politeness marker should be taught in the classroom.
3. Textbook should include appropriate formal instruction about com as a politeness marker.1) Introducing com as a chunk with a cwu-sey-yo verb in a requesting
sentence will be helpful for the learners.2) A detailed gloss of com must be provided, for example, ‘sort of, kind
of, or please’.
Suggestion and Conclusion
Thank you!
Production TestTable 4. The number of correct location of com on the production test
Number of com
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Total
NS (n=10) 8 (0.8) 12 (1.2) 6 (0.6) 10 (1) 9 (.9) 45 (.9)
HL (n=43) 22 14 9 10 9 64
NHL (n=41)
9 10 4 2 6 31
Table 5. The number of correct spelling of com on the production test
Number of com
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Total
HL (n=43) 16 13 9 10 9 64
NHL (n=41)
10 10 5 2 7 34