新HSK 4, 5급 어휘의 등가어, 비등가어 분석 －수용적 지식을 중심으로－ = Receptive Knowledge Difficulty Analysis of New HSK Level 4 and 5 Vocabulary

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this paper is to verify whether the HSK level 4 or 5 vocabulary achieves internal homogeneity in the case of Koreans. We classified HSK level 4 and 5 vocabulary as equivalence words and non-equivalence words. We hypothesized that the mean score of equivalents would be lower than that of non-equivalence words.
As a result, the average score difference between the equivalence words and non-equivalence words of the Level 4 verb was 38.40 points, the score difference between the adjective equivalent words and the non-equivalence word was 35.3 points, and the score difference between the adverb equivalence words and the non-equivalence word was 33.70 points. The difference between the average score for grade 4 equivalent and non-equivalent words was 35.8 points, which was very large.
The average score for level 4 verbs is 79.5 points, the average score for adjectives is 80.8 points, and the average score for adverbs is 73.5 points.
The average score difference between equivalence words and non- equivalence of level 5 verbs was 31.7 points, the difference between equivalence words and non-equivalence words was 29.2 points, and the difference between adverb equivalence words and non-equivalence words was 26.3 points. The difference between the average score of level 5 equivalence words and non-equivalent words was 29.1 points.
The average score of level 5 verbs is 82.7 points, the average score of adjectives is 82.1 points, and the average score of adverbs is 83.2 points.
Looking at the results of the above research analysis, it can be confirmed that the current HSK level 4 vocabulary is not homogeneous in difficulty between the vocabulary words for Koreans. It can be seen that the level 5 vocabulary of the new HSK is not uniform in difficulty between the same words.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Teng Shou-hsin, "현대중국어교육문법연구" 한국문화사 2012

2 Teng Shou-hsin, "현대중국어 교육어법법연구" 학고방 2005

3 서진현, "한국인 학습자를 위한 현대중국어 동사 등급분류 설계" 한국중국어교육학회 (21) : 67-89, 2015

4 진현 ; 박병선, "한국인 학습자를 위한 HSK 동사 등급 탐구" 영남중국어문학회 (87) : 237-260, 2021

5 박용진, "한국인 중국어 학습자를 위한 필수문법항목 설계" 한국중국언어학회 (57) : 357-384, 2015

6 고려대학교 민족문화연구원 중국어대사전편찬실, "중한사전" 2002

7 김석영 ; 송홍령 ; 이강재 ; 이미경 ; 이연숙, "중국어 평가 문항 작성 기법 연구 ― 신HSK, SNULT, FLEX 선택형 문항에 대한 비판적 분석을 중심으로" 중국어문학연구회 (90) : 261-288, 2015

8 김영은, "수용적 어휘 지식과 산출적 어휘 지식, 어휘 학습 전략의 관계" 한국영어어문교육학회 14 (14): 283-306, 2008

9 성태제, "문항 제작 및 분석의 이론과 실제" 학지사 2004

10 孙晓明, "第二语言学习者产出性词汇机制研究" (4) : 2009

11 中国社会科学院语言研究所词典编辑室, "现代汉语词典" 2016

12 张江丽, "汉语第二语言学习者接受性词汇量实证研究" (3) : 2017

13 孔子学院总部, "新汉语水平考试大纲 4, 5级" 2015

14 Laufer, B., "Vocabulary: Description, acquisition, and pedagogy" Cambridge University press 1997

15 Henriksen，B．, "Three dimensions of vocabulary development" 21 (21): 1999

16 Palmer, H. E．, "The oral method of teaching language" Heffer 1921

17 Laufer, B, "The Relationship Between Passive and Active Vocabularies: Effects of LanguageLearning Context" 48 (48): 1998

18 Stockwell, "The Grammatical Structures of English and Spanish. Contrastive Structure Series" 1965

19 Laufer，B．, "The Development of Passive and Active Vocabulary in a Second Language: Same or Different?．" 19 : 1998

20 박용진 ; 마영효, "Prator의 난이도등급 가설의 검증 - 중국어 문법의 능숙도 시험 개발을 위한 분석 -" 한국중국어교육학회 (28) : 285-308, 2018

21 Jiang, Nan, "Lexical Representation and Development in a Second Language" 21 : 2000

22 I. S. P. Nation, "I. S. P. Nation의 외국어어휘의 교수와 학습" 소통 출판사 2012

23 Schmitt, N., "Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test" 18 : 2001

24 이상희 ; 정양수 ; 김성희, "DDL 교수법이 영어 생산적 및 수용적 어휘 지식과 읽기 능력에 미치는 효과 연구" 한국현대언어학회 35 (35): 341-360, 2019