´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ ÀüÀÚÀú³Î

´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ

26±Ç 1È£ (2018³â 3¿ù)

½ÃÆ®ÄÞÀ» È°¿ëÇÑ Á¤ÇüÈ­µÈ ¹è¿­(Formulaic Sequences)ÀÇ È¿°úÀûÀÎ ÇнÀ ¹æ¾È

±èÇýÁ¤

Pages : 119-143

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24303/lakdoi.2018.26.1.119

PDFº¸±â

¸®½ºÆ®

Abstract

Kim, Hye Jeong. (2018). Learning formulaic sequences using a sitcom in a second-language classroom. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 26(1), 119-143. The purpose of this study is to consider effective approaches to the acquisition of formulaic sequences using a sitcom in a classroom and to consider the necessity and possibility of learning and teaching using sitcoms. To find out what teachers should focus on when using sitcoms as learning material in their classrooms, this study consists of two groups of subjects: an experimental group that focuses on the story, context, and situation of characters in a sitcom; and a control group that focuses on linguistic analysis and grammatical explanation of sentence structure. The results show that teaching using the story and context of a sitcom has a more positive effect on learning formulaic sequences than linguistic analysis and grammar. Visual media such as sitcoms have the substantial advantage of having their own stories and diverse situations in which characters are placed. Teaching and learning formulaic sequences using visual media can be beneficial as a way to connect them with the story and its specific situations. Formulaic sequences and specialized patterns contribute to a speakers fluency in communication. It is necessary for learners to notice and recognize formulaic sequences and to try to acquire them.

Keywords

# Á¤ÇüÈ­µÈ ¹è¿­(formulaic sequences) # ¹®¸Æ(context) # »óȲ(situation) # ÁٰŸ®(story) # ¿µ»ó ¸Åü(visual media) # ½ÃÆ®ÄÞ(sitcom)

References

  • ±èÇýÁ¤. (2016). ¿µÈ­¸¦ È°¿ëÇÑ ¸í½ÃÀû ¿µ¾î °ÅÀý È­Çà ÇнÀ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¿¬±¸. ¾ð¾îÇÐ, 24(1), 71-94.
  • ±èÇýÁ¤. (2017). Á¦ 2¾ð¾î, ¹®È­ ¹× À±¸® ±³À° ÀÚ·á·Î¼­ÀÇ ¿µÈ­ À½¾Ç È°¿ë: ¶óÀÌ¿Â Å· OST¸¦ Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î. Çѱ¹ÄÜÅÙÃ÷ÇÐȸ³í¹®Áö, 17(5), 509-519.
  • À¯µµÇü. (2015). ¿µÈ­ ´ãÈ­ÀÇ È­¿ëÀû Ư¼ºÀÌ ±â¾ï·Â¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ. ¾ð¾îÇÐ, 23(1), 161-181.
  • ÀÌÁöÇö, ÀÌÀÚ¿ø. (2014). ¹Ìµå¸¦ ÅëÇØ º» ¾îÈÖÁ¢±Ù¹ýÀÇ Çã¿Í ½Ç. ¿µ»ó¿µ¾î±³À°, 15(1), 175-195.
  • Alali, F. A., & Schmitt, N. (2012). Teaching formulaic sequences: The same as or different from teaching single words? TESOL Journal, 3(2), 153-180.
  • Bishop, H. (2004). Noticing formulaic sequences: A problem of measuring the subjective. LSO Working Papers in Linguistics, 4, 15-19. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.
  • Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Vellenga, H. E. (2012). The effect of instruction on conventional expressions in L2 pragmatics. System, 40, 77-89.
  • De Bot, K., Paribakht, S. T., & Wesche, B. M. (1997). Towards a lexical processing model for the study of second language vocabulary acquisition. SSLA, 19(3), 309-329.
  • Ellis, G., & Brewster, J. (1990). The storytelling handbook for primary teacher. London: Penguin.
  • Ellis, R. (1993). The structural syllabus and second language acquisition. TESOL Quarterly, 27, 91-113.
  • Ellis, R. (2002). Methodological options in grammar teaching materials. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspective on grammar teaching in second language classroom (pp. 155-180). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbarm Associates.
  • Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open choice principle. Text, 20(1), 29-62.
  • Herron, C., York, H., Corrie, C., & Cole, P. S. (2006). A comparison study of the effects of a story-based video instructional package versus a text-based instructional package in the intermediate-level foreign language classroom. CALICO Journal, 23(2), 281-307.
  • House, J. (1996). Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language: Routines and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(2), 225-252.
  • Hsu, T. J. (2007). Lexical collocations and their relation to the online writing of Taiwanese college English majors and non-English majors. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 4(2), 192-209.
  • Hsu, T. J., & Chiu, C. (2008). Lexical collocations and their relation to speaking proficiency. The Asian EFL Journal, 10(1), 181-204.
  • Jones, M., & Haywood, S. (2004). Facilitating the acquisition of formulaic sequences: An exploratory study in an EAP context. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 269-300). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
  • Keshavarz, M. H., & Salimi, H. (2007). Collocational competence and cloze test performance: A study of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 81-92.
  • Khodadady, E., & Shamsaee, S. (2012). Formulaic sequences and their relationship with speaking and listening abilities. English Language Teaching, 5(2), 39-49.
  • Kim, B. G. (2011). A study of teaching communicative grammar through multi-media technology. STEM Journal, 12(2), 143-165.
  • Laufer, B., & Waldman, T. (2011). Verb-noun collocations in second language writing: A corpus analysis of learners¡¯ English. Language Learning, 61(2), 647-672.
  • Lewis, M. (2009). The idiom principle in L2 English: Assessing elusive formulaic sequences as indicators of idiomaticity, fluency, and proficiency. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag Dr. Mὔller.
  • Martínez, I. B. (2007). A story-based approach to teaching English. Encuentro, 17, 52-56.
  • Meunier, F., & Granger, S. (Eds.). (2008). Phraseology in foreign language learning and teaching. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
  • Nemeth, N., & Kormos, J. (2001). Pragmatic aspects of task performance: The case of argumentation. Language Teaching Research, 5(3), 213-240.
  • Oller, J. Jr. (1983). Some working ideas for language teaching. In J. Oller, Jr & P. R. Amato (Eds.), Methods that work (pp. 3-19). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
  • Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Schmitt, N., & Carter, R. (2004). Formulaic sequences in action: An introduction. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences (pp. 1-22). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: John Benjamins.
  • Takimoto, M. (2006). The effects of explicit feedback on the development of pragmatic proficiency. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 393-417.
  • Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463-489.
  • Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic language: Pushing the boundaries. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.