RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      How to Use Semantic Features in Teaching (Non-) Factive Verbs

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A106931227

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      The purpose of this study is to find out what kinds of verbs learners found most difficult to use precisely among factive and non-factive verbs and to suggest teaching strategies that will help them to use those confusing verbs correctly. In this study, nine semantically confusing verbs, ‘point out’ and ‘say’, ‘show’ and ‘suggest’, ‘claim’, ‘insist’ and ‘argue’ and ‘doubt’ and ‘suggest’ were selected among factive and non-factive verbs.
      The findings of the study and the implications are the following: 1) Between factive and non-factive verbs, participants were poor at distinguishing non-factive verbs ‘suggest’ and ‘say’. When teaching these verbs, it should be emphasized that they cannot take clauses which prove to be true but clauses which are based on one’s belief.
      2) Between non-factive verbs ‘claim’ and ‘insist’, subjects found ‘claim’ more difficult to use correctly. When teaching about this verb, the focus should be on its [NON-EVIDENT] element.
      3) Between non-factive verbs ‘suspect’ and ‘doubt’, participants considered ‘suspect’ more challenging to use precisely. When teaching about the verb, a [believe] element should be considered.
      번역하기

      The purpose of this study is to find out what kinds of verbs learners found most difficult to use precisely among factive and non-factive verbs and to suggest teaching strategies that will help them to use those confusing verbs correctly. In this stud...

      The purpose of this study is to find out what kinds of verbs learners found most difficult to use precisely among factive and non-factive verbs and to suggest teaching strategies that will help them to use those confusing verbs correctly. In this study, nine semantically confusing verbs, ‘point out’ and ‘say’, ‘show’ and ‘suggest’, ‘claim’, ‘insist’ and ‘argue’ and ‘doubt’ and ‘suggest’ were selected among factive and non-factive verbs.
      The findings of the study and the implications are the following: 1) Between factive and non-factive verbs, participants were poor at distinguishing non-factive verbs ‘suggest’ and ‘say’. When teaching these verbs, it should be emphasized that they cannot take clauses which prove to be true but clauses which are based on one’s belief.
      2) Between non-factive verbs ‘claim’ and ‘insist’, subjects found ‘claim’ more difficult to use correctly. When teaching about this verb, the focus should be on its [NON-EVIDENT] element.
      3) Between non-factive verbs ‘suspect’ and ‘doubt’, participants considered ‘suspect’ more challenging to use precisely. When teaching about the verb, a [believe] element should be considered.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 Soanes, C., "‘non-factive adjective’ in The Oxford Dictionary of English, Revised Edition"

      2 Soanes, C., "‘factive adjective’ in The Oxford Dictionary of English, Revised Edition"

      3 Li, M., "The power of Rasch person-fit statistics in detecting unusual response patterns" 21 : 215-231, 1997

      4 Wierzbicka, Anna, "Semantics. Primes and Universals" OUP 1996

      5 McNamara, T., "Measuring second language performance" Longman 1996

      6 Cruse, Alan, "Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics" Oxford University Press 2000

      7 Williams, H., "Lexical frames and reported speech" 58 : 247-257, 2004

      8 Rieder, A., "Implicit and explicit learning in incidental vocabulary acquisition" 2003

      9 Linacre, M., "A user’s guide to WINSTEPS Rasch model computer programs" Winsteps. com 2009

      10 김나유, "A Study on the Definite Article in English Based on the Rasch Model" 대한언어학회 26 (26): 37-54, 2018

      1 Soanes, C., "‘non-factive adjective’ in The Oxford Dictionary of English, Revised Edition"

      2 Soanes, C., "‘factive adjective’ in The Oxford Dictionary of English, Revised Edition"

      3 Li, M., "The power of Rasch person-fit statistics in detecting unusual response patterns" 21 : 215-231, 1997

      4 Wierzbicka, Anna, "Semantics. Primes and Universals" OUP 1996

      5 McNamara, T., "Measuring second language performance" Longman 1996

      6 Cruse, Alan, "Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics" Oxford University Press 2000

      7 Williams, H., "Lexical frames and reported speech" 58 : 247-257, 2004

      8 Rieder, A., "Implicit and explicit learning in incidental vocabulary acquisition" 2003

      9 Linacre, M., "A user’s guide to WINSTEPS Rasch model computer programs" Winsteps. com 2009

      10 김나유, "A Study on the Definite Article in English Based on the Rasch Model" 대한언어학회 26 (26): 37-54, 2018

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2022 평가예정 신규평가 신청대상 (신규평가)
      2021-12-01 평가 등재후보 탈락 (계속평가)
      2020-12-01 평가 등재후보로 하락 (재인증) KCI등재후보
      2017-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2016-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재후보
      2014-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.14 0.14 0
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0 0 0 0.11
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼