1,954 research outputs found

    ํ•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•

    COMMUNICATION AND GRAMMATICALIZATION. THE CASE OF (CROATIAN) DEMONSTRATIVES

    Get PDF
    The focus of this paper is on the role that shared reference plays in communication and, relatedly, on the way in which communicative needs drive the formation and development of grammatical categories. The system used to illustrate and analyse the theoretical positions addressed in the paper is that of Croatian demonstratives, a three-way paradigm which โ€“ it is claimed โ€“ helps us identify the cognitive elements underlying the anchoring of shared reference. In the first part of the paper we explore the pointing gesture from the perspectives of developmental psychology, language acquisition and that of cognitive and linguistic universals. We observe that communicative pointing is a universal communicative device found in all cultures which serves to refer, locate in space or indicate direction of motion. In fact, pointing has been recognized as one of the earliest and most common mechanisms for establishing joint reference. Next, we explore the possible ways in which communicative pointing might have influenced the formation of โ€˜pointing wordsโ€™ i.e. demonstratives. A continuum of referential devices is identified: from direct pointing with gesture, direct (pro)nominal pointing, via referentiality through (adjectival and adverbial) modification, all the way to discoursal pointing. We investigate the communicative sequence that takes us from the pointing gesture to various types of โ€˜pointing wordsโ€™ (see Diessel, 2006), by exploring the underlying linguistic and, possibly, cognitive universal elements and domains. In final analysis the identified sequence is put into relation with the referential (identificational), via the modificational (qualificational), to the predicative (informative) segments of language

    KOMUNIKACIJA I GRAMATIKALIZACIJA. ANALIZA (HRVATSKIH) DEMONSTRATIVA

    Get PDF
    The focus of this paper is on the role that shared reference plays in communication and, relatedly, on the way in which communicative needs drive the formation and development of grammatical categories. The system used to illustrate and analyse the theoretical positions addressed in the paper is that of Croatian demonstratives, a three-way paradigm which โ€“ it is claimed โ€“ helps us identify the cognitive elements underlying the anchoring of shared reference. In the first part of the paper we explore the pointing gesture from the perspectives of developmental psychology, language acquisition and that of cognitive and linguistic universals. We observe that communicative pointing is a universal communicative device found in all cultures which serves to refer, locate in space or indicate direction of motion. In fact, pointing has been recognized as one of the earliest and most common mechanisms for establishing joint reference. Next, we explore the possible ways in which communicative pointing might have influenced the formation of โ€˜pointing wordsโ€™ i.e. demonstratives. A continuum of referential devices is identified: from direct pointing with gesture, direct (pro)nominal pointing, via referentiality through (adjectival and adverbial) modification, all the way to discoursal pointing. We investigate the communicative sequence that takes us from the pointing gesture to various types of โ€˜pointing wordsโ€™ (see Diessel, 2006), by exploring the underlying linguistic and, possibly, cognitive universal elements and domains. In final analysis the identified sequence is put into relation with the referential (identificational), via the modificational (qualificational), to the predicative (informative) segments of language.Teorijska postavka prema kojoj komunikacijske potrebe potiฤu razvitak (novih) gramatiฤkih kategorija propituje se u ovome radu na paradigmi demonstrativa u hrvatskome jeziku. U prvome su dijelu rada predstavljene teorijske postavke koje istraลพuju ฤin pokazne geste iz perspektive razvojne psihologije, usvajanja jezika te kognitivno-jeziฤnih univerzalija. Srediลกnja je teza da je pokazna gesta primarni komunikacijski uvjet i alat, bez (usvajanja) kojega nema sposobnosti paralelnoga fokusiranja paลพnje (govornika i sugovornika) na referentne objekte, odnosno nema temeljnoga preduvjeta za uspjeลกnu komunikaciju. Promatra se i poveznica izmeฤ‘u pokazne geste i dijeljene paลพnje (engl. shared attention) s jedne strane, te demonstrativa kao temeljnih โ€˜usmjernih rijeฤiโ€™ (usp. Diessel, 2006) s druge. Drugi je dio rada analitiฤke prirode, a njegov je srediลกnji cilj sistematizacija kompleksne paradigme demonstrativa (od pokaznih zamjenica, preko pokaznih pridjeva i priloga, sve do ฤestica) u hrvatskome jeziku. Predlaลพe se moguฤ‡a konstrukcija takva kontinuuma za hrvatski jezik koji od pokazne geste vodi do โ€žusmjernih rijeฤiโ€, pri ฤemu se dobiveni niz povezuje s referencijalnim (identifikacijskim), modifikacijskim (kvalifikacijskim), te predikativnim (informativnim) segmentima jezika

    Contrastive grammar : a theory and practice handbook

    Get PDF
    En consonancia con los lineamientos del programa vigente de Gramรกtica Contrastiva, materia incluida en el programa de estudios del Traductorado de Inglรฉs de la Facultad de Lenguas, Universidad Nacional de Cรณrdoba, el objetivo principal de Contrastive Grammar: A Theory and Practice Handbook es brindar a los estudiantes un manual que combine las gramรกticas descriptivas del inglรฉs y del espaรฑol. No pretende ser una revisiรณn completa de todas las diferencias lingรผรญsticas existentes entre ambas lenguas: por el contrario, el objetivo del presente manual es combinar informaciรณn teรณrica clave con prรกcticas variadas respecto de estructuras dispares que representan la fuente mรกs frecuente de interferencia entre los dos sistemas.Fil: Gรณmez Calvillo, M. Natalia. Universidad Nacional de Cรณrdoba. Facultad de Lenguas; Argentina.Fil: Meehan, Patricia. Universidad Nacional de Cรณrdoba. Facultad de Lenguas; Argentina.Fil: Dรญaz, M. Josefina. Universidad Nacional de Cรณrdoba. Facultad de Lenguas; Argentina.Fil: Rolfi, Laura. Universidad Nacional de Cรณrdoba. Facultad de Lenguas; Argentina

    A Representation of Selected Nonmanual Signals in American Sign Language

    Get PDF
    Computer-generated three-dimensional animation holds great promise for synthesizing utterances in American Sign Language (ASL) that are not only grammatical, but believable by members of the Deaf community. Animation poses several challenges stemming from the massive amounts of data necessary to specify the movement of three-dimensional geometry, and there is no current system that facilitates the synthesis of nonmanual signals. However, the linguistics of ASL can aid in surmounting the challenge by providing structure and rules for organizing the data. This work presents a first method for representing ASL linguistic and extralinguistic processes that involve the face. Any such representation must be capable of expressing the subtle nuances of ASL. Further, it must be able to represent co-occurrences because many ASL signs require that two or more nonmanual signals be used simultaneously. In fact simultaneity of multiple nonmanual signals can occur on the same facial feature. Additionally, such a system should allow both binary and incremental nonmanual signals to display the full range of adjectival and adverbial modifiers. Validating such a representation requires both the affirmation that nonmanual signals are indeed necessary in the animation of ASL, and the evaluation of the effectiveness of the new representation in synthesizing nonmanual signals. In this study, members of the Deaf community viewed animations created with the new representation and answered questions concerning the influence of selected nonmanual signals on the perceived meaning of the synthesized utterances. Results reveal that, not only is the representation capable of effectively portraying nonmanual signals, but also that it can be used to combine various nonmanual signals in the synthesis of complete ASL sentences. In a study with Deaf users, participants viewing synthesized animations consistently identified the intended nonmanual signals correctly

    Contextual Non-verbal Behaviour Generation for Humanoid Robot Using Text Sentiment

    Get PDF
    This paper describes an approach to synthesise non-verbal behaviours for a humanoid robot Pepper using spoken text. Our approach takes into account the sentiment of the spoken text and maps the appropriate gesture and sound relevant to that text in a parameterised manner. This work forms a basis for our planned user study where we will evaluate this approach

    Shaping Robot Gestures to Shape Users' Perception: the Effect of Amplitude and Speed on Godspeed Ratings

    Get PDF
    This work analyses the relationship between the way robots gesture and the way those gestures are perceived by human users. In particular, this work shows how modifying the amplitude and speed of a gesture affect the Godspeed scores given to those gestures, by means of an experiment involving 45 stimuli and 30 observers. The results suggest that shaping gestures aimed at manifesting the inner state of the robot (e.g., cheering or showing disappointment) tends to change the perception of Animacy (the dimension that accounts for how driven by endogenous factors the robot is perceived to be), while shaping gestures aimed at achieving an interaction effect (e.g., engaging and disengaging) tends to change the perception of Anthropomorphism, Likeability and Perceived Safety (the dimensions that account for the social aspects of the perception)

    SICOL : proceedings of the Second International Conference on Oceanic Linguistics : Vol. 2, Historical and descriptive studies

    Get PDF

    Tetun Dili : a grammar of an East Timorese language

    Get PDF
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore