1,514 research outputs found

    A Morphological Analyzer for Filipino Verbs

    Get PDF
    PACLIC / The University of the Philippines Visayas Cebu College Cebu City, Philippines / November 20-22, 200

    ํ•œ๊ตญ์ธ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™์ƒ์˜ ์˜์–ด ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ ํ•™์Šต์—์„œ์˜ ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ๊ต์ˆ˜์˜ ํšจ๊ณผ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์‚ฌ๋ฒ”๋Œ€ํ•™ ์™ธ๊ตญ์–ด๊ต์œก๊ณผ(์˜์–ด์ „๊ณต), 2022.2. ๊น€๊ธฐํƒ.English adjectival transitive resultative constructions (VtR) are notoriously challenging for Korean L2 English learners due to their syntactic and semantic differences from their L1 counterparts. To deal with such a complex structure, like English adjectival VtR, Korean L2 English learners need instructional interventions, including explicit instructions and corrective feedback on the target structure. Human instructors are virtually incapable of offering adequate corrective feedback, as providing corrective feedback from a human teacher to hundreds of students requires excessive time and effort. To deal with the practicality problems faced by human instructors in providing corrective feedback, numerous artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have been developed to provide foreign language learners with corrective feedback on par with human teachers. Regrettably, many currently available AI chatbots remain underdeveloped. In addition, no prior research has been conducted to assess the effectiveness of corrective feedback offered by an AI chatbot, a human instructor, or additional explicit instruction via video material. The current study examined the instructional effects of corrective feedback from an AI chatbot on Korean high school studentsโ€™ comprehension and production of adjectival VtR. Also, the current study investigated whether the corrective feedback generated by the AI chatbot enables Korean L2 English learners to expand their constructional repertoire beyond instructed adjectival VtR to uninstructed prepositional VtR. To investigate these issues, text-based Facebook Messenger AI chatbots were developed by the researcher. The effectiveness of the AI chatbotsโ€™ corrective feedback was compared with that of a human instructor and with additional video material. Students were divided into four groups: three instructional groups and one control group. The instructional groups included a chatbot group, a human group, and a video group. All learners in the three instructional groups watched a 5-minute explicit instruction video on the form and meaning pairings of the adjectival VtR in English. After that, learners were divided into three groups based on their preferences for instructional types. The learners volunteered to participate in the instructional procedures with corrective feedback from a text-based AI chatbot, a human instructor, or additional explicit instruction using a 15-minute video. Moreover, they took part in three testing sessions, which included a pretest, an immediate posttest, and a delayed posttest. The control group students were not instructed, and only participated in the three testing sessions. Two tasks were used for each test session: an acceptability judgment task (AJT) and an elicited writing task (EWT). The AJT tested participantsโ€™ comprehension of instructed adjectival VtR and uninstructed prepositional VtR. The EWT examined the correct production of instructed adjectival VtR and uninstructed prepositional VtR. The results of the AJT revealed that the instructional treatment (e.g., corrective feedback from the AI chatbot or a human instructor, or additional explicit instruction from the video material) was marginally more effective at improving the comprehension of adjectival VtR than was the case with the control group. On the other hand, the instructional treatment on the adjectival VtR failed in the generalization to prepositional VtR which was not overtly instructed. In the EWT, the participants in the corrective feedback groups (e.g., the chatbot and human groups) showed a more significant increase in the correct production of the instructed adjectival VtR more so than those in the video and control groups. Furthermore, the chatbot group learners showed significantly higher production of uninstructed prepositional VtR compared to any other group participants. These findings suggest that chatbot-based instruction can help Korean high school L2 English learners comprehend and produce complex linguistic structuresโ€”namely, adjectival and prepositional VtR. Moreover, the current study has major pedagogical implications for principled frameworks for implementing AI chatbot-based instruction in the context of foreign language learning.์˜์–ด ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ(English Adjectival Transitive Resultative Construction)์€ ํ•œ๊ตญ์ธ ์˜์–ด ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๋ชจ๊ตญ์–ด์˜ ๋Œ€์‘ ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์ด ๊ฐ–๋Š” ์˜๋ฏธ ํ†ต์‚ฌ๋ก ์  ์ฐจ์ด๋กœ ์ธํ•ด ํ•™์Šตํ•˜๊ธฐ ๋งค์šฐ ์–ด๋ ค์šด ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ์•Œ๋ ค์ ธ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋”ฐ๋ผ์„œ ์˜์–ด ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๋ณต์žกํ•œ ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์„ ํ•™์Šตํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ, ํ•œ๊ตญ์ธ ์˜์–ด ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ๋Š” ๋ชฉํ‘œ ๊ตฌ์กฐ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๋ช…์‹œ์  ๊ต์ˆ˜์™€ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ํฌํ•จํ•œ ๊ต์ˆ˜ ์ฒ˜์น˜๊ฐ€ ์š”๊ตฌ๋œ๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜๋ฐฑ ๋ช…์˜ ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด์„œ๋Š” ๊ณผ๋„ํ•œ ์‹œ๊ฐ„๊ณผ ๋…ธ๋ ฅ์ด ์š”๊ตฌ๋˜๊ธฐ ๋•Œ๋ฌธ์—, ์ธ๊ฐ„ ๊ต์‚ฌ๊ฐ€ ์ ์ ˆํ•œ ์–‘์˜ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ์‚ฌ์‹ค์ƒ ๋ถˆ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•˜๋‹ค. ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•  ๋•Œ ์ง๋ฉดํ•˜๋Š” ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์‹ค์šฉ์„ฑ ๋ฌธ์ œ๋ฅผ ํ•ด๊ฒฐํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•˜์—ฌ, ์™ธ๊ตญ์–ด ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์—๊ฒŒ ์ธ๊ฐ„ ๊ต์‚ฌ์™€ ์œ ์‚ฌํ•œ ๊ต์ • ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ˆ˜๋งŽ์€ ์ธ๊ณต ์ง€๋Šฅ(AI) ์ฑ—๋ด‡์ด ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์œ ๊ฐ์Šค๋Ÿฝ๊ฒŒ๋„, ํ˜„์žฌ ์‚ฌ์šฉ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•œ ๋งŽ์€ ์™ธ๊ตญ์–ด ํ•™์Šต์šฉ ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์€ ์•„์ง ์ถฉ๋ถ„ํžˆ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœ๋˜์ง€ ์•Š์€ ์ƒํƒœ์— ๋‚จ์•„์žˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์˜ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์ด ๊ฐ–๋Š” ๊ต์ˆ˜ํšจ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ๋น„๊ต ๋ถ„์„ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ํ˜„์žฌ ์ด๋ฃจ์–ด์ง€์ง€ ์•Š์€ ์ƒํƒœ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ์„ ํ–‰์—ฐ๊ตฌ์˜ ํ•œ๊ณ„์— ์ดˆ์ ์„ ๋‘์–ด, ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์˜ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์ด ํ•œ๊ตญ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™์ƒ์˜ ์˜์–ด ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ์ดํ•ด์™€ ์ƒ์„ฑ์— ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ๊ต์ˆ˜ ํšจ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์‚ดํŽด๋ณด์•˜๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๊ต์ˆ˜ ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ์–ธ์–ด์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ๋‹ค๋ฅธ ์˜์–ด ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์—๋„ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ผ์น˜๋Š”์ง€๋ฅผ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ๊ต์‹ค์—์„œ ์ง์ ‘ ๊ฐ€๋ฅด์น˜์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๋˜ ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์ธ ์˜์–ด ์ „์น˜์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ(English Prepositional Transitive Resultative Construction)์˜ ํ•™์Šต ์–‘์ƒ์„ ์•Œ์•„๋ณด์•˜๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ์œ„ํ•ด, ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—์„œ๋Š” ํ…์ŠคํŠธ ๋ฉ”์‹œ์ง€ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์˜ ํŽ˜์ด์Šค๋ถ ๋ฉ”์‹ ์ €์—์„œ ๊ตฌ๋™๋˜๋Š” ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์„ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์˜ ๊ต์ˆ˜ํšจ๊ณผ ๊ฒ€์ฆ์„ ์œ„ํ•ด ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์— ์ฐธ์—ฌํ•œ ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์€ ๋„ค ๊ฐœ์˜ ์ง‘๋‹จ์œผ๋กœ ๊ตฌ๋ถ„๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค: ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ๊ต์ˆ˜ ์ง‘๋‹จ์—๋Š” ๊ต์ˆ˜์ฒ˜์น˜๊ฐ€ ์ ์šฉ๋˜์—ˆ๊ณ , ํ•œ ๊ฐœ์˜ ํ†ต์ œ ์ง‘๋‹จ์—์„œ๋Š” ๊ต์ˆ˜์ฒ˜์น˜๊ฐ€ ์ ์šฉ๋˜์ง€ ์•Š์•˜๋‹ค. ๊ต์ˆ˜์ฒ˜์น˜๊ฐ€ ์ ์šฉ๋œ ์„ธ ๊ฐœ์˜ ์ง‘๋‹จ์€ ์ฑ—๋ด‡๊ทธ๋ฃน, ์ธ๊ฐ„๊ทธ๋ฃน, ์˜์ƒ๊ทธ๋ฃน์œผ๋กœ ๋ถ„๋ฅ˜๋˜์—ˆ์œผ๋ฉฐ, ์ด๋“ค์€ ๋ชจ๋‘ ์˜์–ด๋กœ ๋œ ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ํ˜•ํƒœ์™€ ์˜๋ฏธ ์Œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ 5๋ถ„ ๊ธธ์ด์˜ ํ•™์Šต ๋น„๋””์˜ค๋ฅผ ์‹œ์ฒญํ•จ์œผ๋กœ์จ ๋ช…์‹œ์  ๊ต์ˆ˜ ์ฒ˜์น˜๋ฅผ ๋ฐ›์•˜๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ๋น„๋””์˜ค๋ฅผ ์‹œ์ฒญํ•œ ํ›„ ์„ธ ๊ทธ๋ฃน์˜ ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์€ ๊ต์žฌ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ์ œ๊ณต๋˜๋Š” ์–ธ์–ด์—ฐ์Šต์ž๋ฃŒ๋ฅผ ํ•ด๊ฒฐํ•˜๋Š” ๊ณผ์—…์— ์ฐธ์—ฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋‹ค์Œ์œผ๋กœ ์„ธ ์ง‘๋‹จ(์ฑ—๋ด‡๊ทธ๋ฃน, ์ธ๊ฐ„๊ทธ๋ฃน, ์˜์ƒ๊ทธ๋ฃน)์€ ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ์ถ”๊ฐ€์  ๊ต์ˆ˜์ฒ˜์น˜๋ฅผ ๋ฐ›์•˜๋‹ค: ์ฑ—๋ด‡๊ทธ๋ฃน ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์€ ๊ต์žฌ ํ™œ๋™๊ณผ ๊ด€๋ จ๋œ ํ…์ŠคํŠธ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡๊ณผ์˜ ๋Œ€ํ™”์— ์ฐธ์—ฌํ•จ์œผ๋กœ์จ ์˜ค๋ฅ˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ๋ฐ›์•˜๋‹ค. ์ธ๊ฐ„๊ทธ๋ฃน ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์€ ๊ต์žฌํ™œ๋™์„ ์™„์ˆ˜ํ•œ ๋‚ด์šฉ์„ ์ธ๊ฐ„ ๊ต์‚ฌ์—๊ฒŒ ์ „์†กํ•˜๊ณ , ์ด์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ๋ฐ›์•˜๋‹ค. ์˜์ƒ๊ทธ๋ฃน ํ•™์Šต์ž๋“ค์€ ๊ต์žฌํ™œ๋™์„ ์™„์ˆ˜ํ•œ ํ›„ ์ด์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ 15๋ถ„์˜ ์ถ”๊ฐ€์ ์ธ ๋ช…์‹œ์  ๊ต์ˆ˜์ž๋ฃŒ๋ฅผ ์˜์ƒ์œผ๋กœ ์‹œ์ฒญํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ํ•™์Šต์ž์˜ ๊ต์ˆ˜ํšจ๊ณผ๋Š” ์‚ฌ์ „์‹œํ—˜, ์‚ฌํ›„์‹œํ—˜ ๋ฐ ์ง€์—ฐ ์‚ฌํ›„์‹œํ—˜์œผ๋กœ ๊ฒ€์ฆ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ํ•œํŽธ ํ†ต์ œ ์ง‘๋‹จ ํ•™์ƒ๋“ค์€ ๊ต์ˆ˜์ฒ˜์น˜ ์—†์ด ์„ธ ๋ฒˆ์˜ ์‹œํ—˜์—๋งŒ ์ฐธ์—ฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์„ธ ์ฐจ๋ก€์˜ ์‹œํ—˜์—์„œ๋Š” ์ˆ˜์šฉ์„ฑํŒ๋‹จ๊ณผ์ œ(AJT)์™€ ์œ ๋„์ž‘๋ฌธ๊ณผ์ œ(EWT)์˜ ๋‘ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ๊ณผ์ œ๊ฐ€ ์‚ฌ์šฉ๋˜์—ˆ๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์šฉ์„ฑํŒ๋‹จ๊ณผ์ œ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•˜์—ฌ, ๊ต์ˆ˜๋œ ์˜์–ด ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๊ณผ ์ง€์‹œ๋˜์ง€ ์•Š์€ ์˜์–ด ์ „์น˜์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ฐธ๊ฐ€์ž์˜ ์ดํ•ด๋„๋ฅผ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์œ ๋„์ž‘๋ฌธ๊ณผ์ œ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ต์ˆ˜๋œ ์˜์–ด ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๊ณผ ์ง€์‹œ๋˜์ง€ ์•Š์€ ์˜์–ด ์ „์น˜์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์„ ์ฐธ์—ฌ์ž๊ฐ€ ์ •ํ™•ํ•˜๊ฒŒ ์‚ฐ์ถœํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š”์ง€๋ฅผ ์ธก์ •ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์‹œํ—˜์˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋Š” ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์•˜๋‹ค. ์ˆ˜์šฉ์„ฑํŒ๋‹จ๊ณผ์ œ์˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ, ๊ต์ˆ˜์ฒ˜์น˜๊ฐ€ ์ ์šฉ๋œ ์„ธ ์ง‘๋‹จ์ด ํ†ต์ œ ์ง‘๋‹จ๋ณด๋‹ค ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ์ดํ•ด๋„ ํ–ฅ์ƒ์— ์•ฝ๊ฐ„ ๋” ํšจ๊ณผ์ ์ธ ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ํ•˜์ง€๋งŒ ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ต์ˆ˜์ ์ฒ˜์น˜๋Š” ๊ต์ˆ˜๋˜์ง€ ์•Š์€ ์ „์น˜์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์œผ๋กœ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์— ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ์ฃผ์ง€ ๋ชปํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์œ ๋„์ž‘๋ฌธ๊ณผ์ œ์˜ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ, ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์ด๋‚˜ ์ธ๊ฐ„ ๊ต์‚ฌ์— ์˜ํ•ด ์ œ๊ณต๋˜๋Š” ๊ต์ • ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ ๊ทธ๋ฃน์˜ ์ฐธ๊ฐ€์ž๊ฐ€ ์˜์ƒ๊ทธ๋ฃน ๋ฐ ํ†ต์ œ์ง‘๋‹จ์˜ ์ฐธ๊ฐ€์ž๋ณด๋‹ค ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ์˜ฌ๋ฐ”๋ฅธ ์ƒ์„ฑ์— ๋” ์œ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ๋ฏธ์น˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์œผ๋กœ ๋“œ๋Ÿฌ๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ๋™์ผํ•œ ๊ต์ˆ˜ ํšจ๊ณผ๊ฐ€ ์ „์น˜์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์—์„œ๋„ ๊ด€์ธก๋˜์–ด, ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์ด ์ „์น˜์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ์˜ ํ•™์Šต์— ์ผ๋ฐ˜ํ™”๊ฐ€ ์ผ์–ด๋‚ฌ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ธ๊ฐ„ ๊ต์‚ฌ๊ฐ€ ์ง๋ฉดํ•ด์•ผ ํ•˜๋Š” ์‹ค์šฉ์„ฑ ๋ฌธ์ œ๋ฅผ ๊ทน๋ณตํ•˜๊ณ , ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡์ด ํ•œ๊ตญ์ธ ๊ณ ๋“ฑํ•™๊ต L2 ์˜์–ด ํ•™์Šต์ž๊ฐ€ ํ˜•์šฉ์‚ฌ ๋ฐ ์ „์น˜์‚ฌ ํƒ€๋™๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๊ตฌ๋ฌธ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๋ณต์žกํ•œ ์–ธ์–ด ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฅผ ์ดํ•ดํ•˜๊ณ  ์ƒ์„ฑํ•˜๋Š” ๋ฐ์— ์ธ๊ฐ„ ๊ต์‚ฌ์™€ ๋น„๊ฒฌ๋  ์ •๋„๋กœ ๊ต์ •์  ํ”ผ๋“œ๋ฐฑ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•  ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ์„ ๊ฒƒ์ž„์„ ์‹œ์‚ฌํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ๋ณธ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋Š” ์ธ๊ณต์ง€๋Šฅ ์ฑ—๋ด‡ ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ์™ธ๊ตญ์–ด ๊ต์œก์˜ ์‹ค์ œ์  ์‚ฌ๋ก€ ๋ฐ ํšจ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์„ ๋„์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋ณด์—ฌ์ฃผ์—ˆ๋‹ค๋Š” ์ ์—์„œ ์˜๋ฏธ๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋‹ค.ABSTRACT i TABLE OF CONTENTS iii LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF FIGURES vii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1. Statement of Problems and Objectives 1 1.2. Scope of the Research 6 1.3. Research Questions 9 1.4. Organization of the Dissertation 10 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 12 2.1. Syntactic and Semantic Analysis of Korean and English Transitive Resultative Constructions 13 2.1.1. Syntactic Analysis of English Transitive Resultative Construction 13 2.1.2. Syntactic Analysis of Korean Transitive Resultative Constructions 25 2.1.3. Semantic Differences in VtR between Korean and English 46 2.1.4. Previous acquisition study on English adjectival and prepositional VtR 54 2.2. Corrective Feedback 59 2.2.1. Definition of Corrective Feedback 59 2.2.2. Types of Corrective Feedback 61 2.2.3. Noticeability in Corrective Feedback 67 2.2.4. Corrective Recast as a Stepwise Corrective Feedback 69 2.3. The AI Chatbot in Foreign Language Learning 72 2.3.1. Non-communicative Intelligent Computer Assisted Language Learning (ICALL) 73 2.3.2. AI Chatbot without Corrective Feedback 79 2.3.3. AI Chatbot with Corrective Feedback 86 2.4. Summary of the Literature Review 92 CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY 98 3.1. Participants 98 3.2. Target Structure 102 3.3. Procedure of the Study 106 3.4. Instructional Material Shared by the Experimental Group 107 3.4.1. General Framework of the Instructional Session 108 3.4.2. Instructional Material Shared by Experimental Groups 111 3.5. Group-specific Instructional Treatments: Post-Written Instructional Material Activities on Corrective Feedback from Chatbot, Human, and Additional Explicit Instruction via Video 121 3.5.1. Corrective Feedback from the AI Chatbot 122 3.5.2. Corrective Feedback from a Human Instructor 136 3.5.3. Additional Instruction via Video Material 139 3.6. Test 142 3.6.1. Acceptability Judgment Task (AJT) 144 3.6.2. Elicited Writing Task (EWT) 150 3.7. Statistical Analysis 152 CHAPTER 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 154 4.1. Results of Acceptability Judgment Task (AJT) 154 4.1.1. AJT Results of Instructed Adjectival VtR 155 4.1.2. AJT Results of Uninstructed Prepositional VtR 160 4.1.3. Discussion 164 4.2. Results of Elicited Writing Task (EWT) 175 4.2.1. EWT Results for Instructed Adjectival VtR 176 4.2.2. EWT Results of Uninstructed Prepositional VtR 181 4.2.3. Further Analysis 187 4.2.4. Discussion 199 CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION 205 5.1. Summary of the Findings and Implications 205 5.2. Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research 213 REFERENCES 217 APPENDICES 246 ABSTRACT IN KOREAN 297๋ฐ•

    A survey of studies in systemic functional language description and typology

    Get PDF
    Version of RecordPublishe

    Proceedings of the First Workshop on Computing News Storylines (CNewsStory 2015)

    Get PDF
    This volume contains the proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Computing News Storylines (CNewsStory 2015) held in conjunction with the 53rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 7th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (ACL-IJCNLP 2015) at the China National Convention Center in Beijing, on July 31st 2015. Narratives are at the heart of information sharing. Ever since people began to share their experiences, they have connected them to form narratives. The study od storytelling and the field of literary theory called narratology have developed complex frameworks and models related to various aspects of narrative such as plots structures, narrative embeddings, charactersโ€™ perspectives, reader response, point of view, narrative voice, narrative goals, and many others. These notions from narratology have been applied mainly in Artificial Intelligence and to model formal semantic approaches to narratives (e.g. Plot Units developed by Lehnert (1981)). In recent years, computational narratology has qualified as an autonomous field of study and research. Narrative has been the focus of a number of workshops and conferences (AAAI Symposia, Interactive Storytelling Conference (ICIDS), Computational Models of Narrative). Furthermore, reference annotation schemes for narratives have been proposed (NarrativeML by Mani (2013)). The workshop aimed at bringing together researchers from different communities working on representing and extracting narrative structures in news, a text genre which is highly used in NLP but which has received little attention with respect to narrative structure, representation and analysis. Currently, advances in NLP technology have made it feasible to look beyond scenario-driven, atomic extraction of events from single documents and work towards extracting story structures from multiple documents, while these documents are published over time as news streams. Policy makers, NGOs, information specialists (such as journalists and librarians) and others are increasingly in need of tools that support them in finding salient stories in large amounts of information to more effectively implement policies, monitor actions of โ€œbig playersโ€ in the society and check facts. Their tasks often revolve around reconstructing cases either with respect to specific entities (e.g. person or organizations) or events (e.g. hurricane Katrina). Storylines represent explanatory schemas that enable us to make better selections of relevant information but also projections to the future. They form a valuable potential for exploiting news data in an innovative way.JRC.G.2-Global security and crisis managemen

    The Processing of Emotional Sentences by Young and Older Adults: A Visual World Eye-movement Study

    Get PDF
    Carminati MN, Knoeferle P. The Processing of Emotional Sentences by Young and Older Adults: A Visual World Eye-movement Study. Presented at the Architectures and Mechanisms of Language and Processing (AMLaP), Riva del Garda, Italy

    Passive, deontic modality and cohesive conjunction in English-to-Thai legislative translation: a corpus-based study

    Get PDF
    Scholarly interest in legislative translation has grown substantially over recent decades, with corpus-based approaches contributing much to our understanding of the relationship between translated legislation and source texts, on the one hand, and translated and non-translated legislative texts in the target language, on the other. To date, however, most studies have been conducted on European languages. This study represents a first attempt to use corpus techniques to explore legislative translation from English into Thai. Drawing on a purpose-built, 400,000-word, parallel corpus of international treaties translated from English into Thai, and a one million-word monolingual corpus of legislative texts originally written in Thai, both of which are managed using the Sketch Engine platform, we investigate how selected linguistic featuresโ€”including instances of passive voice, deontic modality and cohesive conjunctionโ€”are translated into Thai. We analyze the inter-linguistic and intra-linguistic differences we find in the light of the possible adoption of โ€˜plain writingโ€™ principles (Williams 2009) in Thai legislation, the legal authenticity of the Thai non-translated texts, previously posited โ€˜features of translationโ€™ including Teichโ€™s (2003) notion of source texts โ€˜shining throughโ€™, Becherโ€™s (2010) approach to explicitation and the presence of โ€˜unique itemsโ€™ (Tirkkonen-Condit 2002), and drawing on Bielโ€™s (2014) concept of โ€˜textual fitโ€™

    The development of bei2 dative constructions in early child Cantonese.

    Get PDF
    Chan Wing Shan Angel.Thesis submitted in: Novemeber 2003.Thesis (M.Phil.)--Chinese University of Hong Kong, 2004.Includes bibliographical references (leaves 152-157).Abstracts in English and Chinese.AcknowledgementsList of AbbreviationsList of Tables and FiguresAbstractChapter Chapter One --- IntroductionChapter 1.0 --- IntroductionChapter 1.1 --- The Target ConstructionChapter 1.1.1 --- The Canonical [bei2-T-R] Double Object FormChapter 1.1.2 --- The Non-Canonical [bei2-R-T] Double Object FormChapter 1.1.3 --- The Non-Canonical [bei2-T-bei2-R] Serial Verb FormChapter 1.1.4 --- The Extended bei2-Da.tiveChapter 1.2 --- A Review of Cantonese Dative ConstructionsChapter Chapter Two --- Theoretical BackgroundChapter 2.0 --- IntroductionChapter 2.1 --- The Markedness HypothesisChapter 2.2 --- The Iconicity HypothesisChapter 2.3 --- The Input Frequency HypothesisChapter 2.4 --- Relevance to CantoneseChapter 2.4.1 --- The Markedness Hypothesis: Empirical PredictionsChapter 2.4.2 --- The Iconicity Hypothesis: Empirical PredictionsChapter 2.4.3 --- The Input Frequency Hypothesis: Empirical PredictionsChapter 2.4.4 --- An Interim Summary of Empirical PredictionsChapter 2.5 --- The Null Dative Marker HypothesisChapter 2.6 --- Conceptualization of End-State Knowledge: Construction GrammarChapter 2.7 --- Introducing the Usage-Based Theory to Child Language AcquisitionChapter Chapter Three --- The Input Properties Hypothesis and Adult Cantonese InputChapter 3.0 --- IntroductionChapter 3.1 --- SchematizationChapter 3.2 --- The Input Properties HypothesisChapter 3.3 --- Two Empirical Hypotheses on the Theme-Recipient AsymmetryChapter 3.3.1 --- Unexpressed Arguments: The Theme Versus The RecipientChapter 3.3.2 --- Susceptibility to Displacement: The Theme Versus The RecipientChapter 3.4 --- A Corpus Study Of Adult InputChapter 3.4.1 --- Methodology For Adult Input AnalysisChapter 3.4.2 --- Corpus FindingsChapter 3.4.2.1 --- The Missing Theme: bei2-Datives with Frequent Null ThemeChapter 3.4.2.2 --- The Non-Canonical [bei2-R-T] FormChapter 3.4.2.3 --- The Non-Canonical [bei2-T-bei2-R] FormChapter 3.4.2.4 --- The Frequent [bei2-R] SequenceChapter 3.5 --- Cantonese Adult Input Properties: Implications for Early SchematizationChapter 3.6 --- Chapter SummaryChapter Chapter Four --- Methodology and Early Developmental FindingsChapter 4.0 --- IntroductionChapter 4.1 --- MethodologyChapter 4.1.1 --- Longitudinal Corpus DataChapter 4.1.1.1 --- Monolingual Child Data: The Hong Kong Cantonese Child Language Corpus (CANCORP)Chapter 4.1.1.2 --- Cantonese-English Bilingual Child Data: The Hong Kong Bilingual Child Language CorpusChapter 4.1.2 --- "Cantonese-English Bilingual Diary Data: Cheung (2002, p.c.)"Chapter 4.1.3 --- Clinical Child Data: Local Speech Therapists in Hong KongChapter 4.1.4 --- Procedures for Data AnalysisChapter 4.2 --- Early Developmental FindingsChapter 4.2.1 --- Non-Full bei2-Datives Before Full bei2-DativesChapter 4.2.2 --- The First Spontaneous Use of Full bei2-DativesChapter 4.2.3 --- All Full bei2-Datives AttestedChapter 4.2.4 --- Early Preference for Non-Canonical FormsChapter 4.2.4.1 --- Possible Priming EffectsChapter 4.2.4.2 --- Placement of PausesChapter 4.2.5 --- The Late Acquisition of the Canonical [bei2-T-R] FormChapter 4.2.6 --- The Non-Target Use of bei2-DativesChapter 4.2.6.1 --- The Non-Target [bei2-R-T] FormChapter 4.2.6.2 --- The Non-Target [bei2-T-bei2-R] FormChapter 4.3 --- Usage Patterns in Older ChildrenChapter 4.4 --- Summary of Major FindingsChapter Chapter Five --- Discussion of FindingsChapter 5.0 --- IntroductionChapter 5.1 --- A Review of Established Empirical PredictionsChapter 5.2 --- The Markedness HypothesisChapter 5.3 --- The Iconicity HypothesisChapter 5.4 --- The Input Frequency HypothesisChapter 5.5 --- The Input Properties HypothesisChapter 5.6 --- Markedness From the UG perspectiveChapter 5.7 --- The Early Preference for Non-Canonical Forms: A Functional PerspectiveChapter 5.8 --- The Source of the Early Non-Canonical bei2-datives: A Usage-Based PerspectiveChapter 5.8.1 --- The Early [bei2-R-T] FormChapter 5.8.1.1 --- Against Learning Directly From The Adult Speech ModelsChapter 5.8.1.2 --- Against Generating Directly From The [bei2-R-T] Verb Specific SchemaChapter 5.8.1.3 --- Against Overgeneralizing the Abstract [V-R-T] SchemaChapter 5.8.2 --- The Early [bei2-T-bei2-R] FormChapter 5.8.2.1 --- Against Learning Directly From The Adult Speech ModelsChapter 5.8.2.2 --- On Overgeneralizing The [V-T-bei2-R] SchemaChapter 5.9 --- Remaining QuestionsChapter 5.10 --- Chapter SummaryChapter Chapter Six --- Conclusions and Further ResearchChapter 6.0 --- IntroductionChapter 6.1 --- Principal ConclusionsChapter 6.2 --- ContributionsChapter 6.3 --- Suggestions for Further ResearchChapter 6.3.1 --- Elicited Production StudiesChapter 6.3.2 --- Comprehension StudiesChapter 6.3.3 --- Cross-Linguistic InvestigationsAppendicesReference

    Negative vaccine voices in Swedish social media

    Get PDF
    Vaccinations are one of the most significant interventions to public health, but vaccine hesitancy creates concerns for a portion of the population in many countries, including Sweden. Since discussions on vaccine hesitancy are often taken on social networking sites, data from Swedish social media are used to study and quantify the sentiment among the discussants on the vaccination-or-not topic during phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. Out of all the posts analyzed a majority showed a stronger negative sentiment, prevailing throughout the whole of the examined period, with some spikes or jumps due to the occurrence of certain vaccine-related events distinguishable in the results. Sentiment analysis can be a valuable tool to track public opinions regarding the use, efficacy, safety, and importance of vaccination

    Caught in the middle โ€“ language use and translation : a festschrift for Erich Steiner on the occasion of his 60th birthday

    Get PDF
    This book celebrates Erich Steinerโ€™s scholarly work. In 25 contributions, colleagues and friends take up issues closely related to his research interests in linguistics and translation studies. The result is a colourful kaleidoscope reflecting the many strands of research questions that Erich Steiner helped advance in the past decades and the cheerful, inspiring atmosphere he continues to create
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore