The purpose of this study is to differentiate the morphologic, syntactic and semantic conditions of adnominal marker 'ui' and to contrast this with Chinese to explore the acquisition of the adnominal marker 'ui' in Chinese learners of Korean language.... The purpose of this study is to differentiate the morphologic, syntactic and semantic conditions of adnominal marker 'ui' and to contrast this with Chinese to explore the acquisition of the adnominal marker 'ui' in Chinese learners of Korean language. The reason for reviewing the adnominal marker 'ui' is because it was anticipated that it would be difficult for the learners of Korean language as second language to understand and appropriately utilize the morphologic, syntactic and semantic contexts and the following obligatory occurrence, voluntary occurrence and non-occurrence. Also, due to the typological differences of Korean language and Chinese language, and the distributional common characteristics and the differences of '的', the Chinese equivalent of 'ui', it was considered to be appropriate for observing various interlanguage phenomena. First, in Chapter I, the purpose and the necessity of the study was clarified, and the prior studies on the acquisition of 'ui' was reviewed to induce research problems. The study problem of this is what differences the usages of adnominal marker 'ui' the Chinese learner of Korean language shows in comparison with Korean native language speaker. In Chapter II, the theoretical background was considered by dividing the composition of the Korean noun phrase taking part in the distribution of 'ui' in morphologic, syntactic and semantic conditions and the L1 factors that may influence the acquisition of 'ui' was reviewed in contrast with the Chinese equivalent expression '的'. In the morphologic and syntactic conditions of the obligatory occurrence environment of 'ui', there are 'argument structure: agent (extended noun phrase)', 'postposition combination structure', 'quantitative noun phrase-noun phrase', and in the semantic conditions, there are 'combination of abstract noun phrases', 'object-location/place', and 'producer-product'. The morphological‧syntactic conditions of voluntary occurrence environment include 'argument structure: agent(transitivity predicate noun)', 'argument structure: theme(transitivity predicate noun)', 'argument structure: agent(intransitivity predicate noun)', and the semantic conditions include 'Possessor-Possession', 'Whole-Part', and 'Time-Direction noun phrase combination'. Lastly, as the morphological‧syntactic condition of non-occurrence, there are 'noun phrase-number noun phrase', 'apposition composition', and 'compound words'. Chapter III developed the grammatical judgment tool based on the morphological‧syntactic and semantic conditions of 'ui' deducted through theoretical background and the linguistic contextual conditions including the items in which the Chinese '的' showed heterogeneous distribution. The experiment was conducted with the 23 L1 speakers of Korean residing in the metropolitan area, 20 Chinese learners and intermediate learners and 20 advanced learners studying in universities and universities' language institutions in metropolitan area. Chapter IV describes the comparison of the average scores of Korean native speakers and Chinese intermediate‧advanced learners in obligatory occurrence, voluntary occurrence and non-occurrence. Firstly, in obligatory occurrence and non-occurrence conditions, the obligated context, the learners were not close to the level of native speakers, and there was the proficiency factor among the learner groups. In the obligatory occurrence environment, the advanced learners only could acquire in 'producer-product'. In the intermediate learners, the percentage of correct answers was 75% or lower that 'ui' was not acquired. In the non-occurrence context, the advanced learners showed high correct answer rate in all lower context. However, the intermediate learners showed correct answer rate, not reaching acquisition in all contexts. Secondly, learners showed much differences with the usages of the native speaker in morphologic‧syntactic conditions of obligatory occurrence context, and in semantic condition context, they showed being closer to the level of native speakers. Thirdly, in case of the voluntary occurrence environment, the different of usage of 'ui' in the learner and the native speakers was different in the morphologic‧syntactic conditions and semantic condition. The item showing difference between the native speakers and the learner group was one context of 'argument structure: theme'. However, the native speaker showed the difference of the proportion of people choosing realization form and non-occurrence form being high, and though the native speakers showed certain preference for postposition realization, the Chinese learner of Korean language selected realization form and non-occurrence form in similar proportion, not showing clear preference as the native speakers. This study has significance in that it has observed the morphologic‧syntactic, semantic characteristics intervening in the realization of the adnominal case marker 'ui' not explicitly instructed and learned in Korean education, It was revealed in this that there is the necessity to instruct and learn the various semantic relationships and functions of the postposition 'ui' in the field of Korean education.
|
