´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ ÀüÀÚÀú³Î

´ëÇѾð¾îÇÐȸ

27±Ç 1È£ (2019³â 3¿ù)

Çѱ¹¾î ¸ð±¹¾î È­ÀÚÀÇ ¿µ¾î ÆÄ»ýÁ¢»ç ÇнÀ ¹× »ç¿ë ¿À·ù¿¡ °üÇÑ ¿¬±¸

±èÁö¿ø ¡¤ ÃÖ¹®È« (Àü³²´ëÇб³)

Pages : 1-28

DOI : https://doi.org/10.24303/lakdoi.2019.27.1.1

PDFº¸±â

¸®½ºÆ®

Abstract

Kim, Jiwon, & Choe, Mun-Hong. (2019). Korean L1 speakers¡¯ recognition and use of L2 English derivational affixes. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 27(1), 1-28. The purpose of this study is to investigate Korean L1 students¡¯ awareness of L2 English derivational affixes and the relationship between one¡¯s morphological knowledge and overall language proficiency. A total of 150 high school students participated in the study. A diagnostic test was developed to assess their morphological knowledge with a set of high-frequency prefixes and suffixes. The results indicate that the degree of ease and difficulty in acquisition of an affixal morpheme is related to its frequency and compositionality but not with its productivity or uniformity; the acquisition of prefixes appear to differ in function of frequency while that of suffixes is more closely associated with grammatical categories. Korean students show some characteristic error patterns. Most notably, they tend to overgeneralize the prefix in- to a wide range of stems, often producing morphologically ill-formed words. A student¡¯s ability to use suffixes predicts the student¡¯s overall English proficiency to a significant degree, but no such relationship is found between one¡¯s knowledge of prefixes and proficiency. Since Korean students can hardly notice and acquire L2 English derivational morphology only on the basis of natural input, explicit instructional interventions and consciousness raising seem to be necessary.

Keywords

# Á¢»ç(affixes) # ÆÄ»ý(derivation) # ¿Ü±¹¾î·Î¼­ÀÇ ¿µ¾î(EFL) # ÇüżÒ(morpheme) # ÇнÀ ¹®Á¦(learning difficulty)

References

  • ±è¹Î±¹. (2011). ÆÄ»ýÁ¢»çÀÇ »ç¿ë ¾ç»ó°ú »ý»ê¼º: ¹®¾î »ç¿ë¿ª°£ÀÇ ºóµµ ºñ±³¸¦ Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î. ÇüÅ·Ð, 13(1), 53-84.
  • ³²½Â¿ì, ±èÁ¤·Ä. (2017). ÃʵîÇб³ 5, 6Çгâ ÇлýµéÀÇ ¿µ¾î ¹®¹ýÇüÅÂ¼Ò ¹ß´Þ ¾ç»ó. ¿Ü±¹¾î±³À°, 24, 153-174.
  • ½Åµ¿±¤, Á¤´Ù¿î. (2009). Á¢»çÀÇ µî±ÞºÐ·ù°¡ ¹Ý¿µµÈ »ç¿ëÀÚ ¸ÂÃã½Ä ¾îÈÖ ¸ñ·Ï Á¦ÀÛ. ¸ÖƼ¹Ìµð¾î¾ð¾î±³À°, 12(3), 169-193.
  • ¾ÈÇý¸², Á¤¹ÌÁø, ÃÖ¼º¹¬. (2014). L2 ÇнÀÀÚÀÇ ¿µ¾î ÆÄ»ýÇüÅÂ¼Ò Áö½Ä. »õÇÑ¿µ¾î¿µ¹®ÇÐ, 56(4), 217-236.
  • Allen, M. (1978). Morphological Investigations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
  • Bauer, L., & Nation, P. (1993). Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253-279.
  • Bauer, L. (2001). Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 95, Morphological productivity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Blevins, W. (2001). Teaching phonics and word study in the intermediate grades: A complete sourcebook. New York: Scholastic.
  • Bock, C. (1948). Prefixes and suffixes. Classical Journal, 44, 132-133.
  • Carlisle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing, 12(3), 169-190.
  • Cho, K. S., & Krashen, S. D. (1994). Acquisition of vocabulary from the Sweet Valley Kids series: Adult ESL acquisition. Journal of Reading, 37(8), 662-667.
  • Choi, S. M. (2007). How derivational prefix instruction impacts incidental vocabulary acquisition and reading comprehension. English Language & Literature Teaching, 13, 1-22.
  • Deacon, S. H., & Kirby, J. R. (2004). Morphological awareness: Just ¡°more phonological¡±? The roles of morphological and phonological awareness in reading development. Applied Psycholinguistics, 25(2), 223-238.
  • Foorman, B. R., Petscher, Y., & Bishop, M. D. (2012). The incremental variance of morphological knowledge to reading comprehension in grades 3–10 beyond prior reading comprehension, spelling, and text reading efficiency. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(6), 792-798.
  • Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2018). An introduction to language (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
  • Harwood, F. W., & Wright, A. M. (1956). Statistical study of English word formation. Language, 32(2), 260-273.
  • Hinkel, E. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching the four skills. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 109-131.
  • Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51(3), 539-558.
  • Katamba, F. (1994). English Words. London: Routledge.
  • Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2008). The role of derivational morphology in the reading comprehension of Spanish-speaking English language learners. Reading and Writing, 21(8), 783-804.
  • Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 440-464.
  • Kuhn, M. R., & Stahl, S. A. (1998). Teaching children to learn word meanings from context: A synthesis and some questions. Journal of Literacy Research, 30(1), 119-138.
  • Laufer, B., & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it? RELC Journal, 28(1), 89-108.
  • Nagy, W. E., & Townsend, D. (2012). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 91-108.
  • Nation, P. (2011). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. Second Language Vocabulary Acquisition: A Rationale for Pedagogy, 55(4), 174-200.
  • Plag, I. (1999). Morphological productivity: Structural constraints in English derivation. Walter de Gruyter.
  • Prince, P. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context versus translations as a function of proficiency. The Modern Language Journal, 80(4), 478-493.
  • Robbins, C., & Ehri, L. C. (1994). Reading storybooks to kindergartners helps them learn new vocabulary words. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 54.
  • Siegel, D. C. (1974). Topics in English morphology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  • Stauffer, R. G. (1942). A study of prefixes in the Thorndike list to establish a list of prefixes that should be taught in the elementary school. The Journal of Educational Research, 35(6), 453-458.
  • Ward, J., & Chuenjundaeng, J. (2009). Suffix knowledge: Acquisition and applications. System, 37(3), 461-469.
  • Webb, S. (2007). Learning word pairs and glossed sentences: The effects of a single context on vocabulary knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 11(1), 63-81.
  • White, T. G., Sowell, J., & Yanagihara, A. (1989). Teaching elementary students to use word-part clues. The Reading Teacher, 42(4), 302-308.
  • White, T. G., Power, M. A., & White, S. (1989). Morphological analysis: Implications for teaching and understanding vocabulary growth. Reading Research Quarterly, 24(3), 283-304.