OAK

교과서에서 사용된 어휘의 진정성(authenticity)에 관한 연구- 코퍼스 기반으로

Metadata Downloads
Abstract
ABSTRACT


A Corpus-based Study of Authenticity of Vocabulary in English Textbook


Jung, Hye Rim
Major in English Education
Graduate School of Education
Sungshin Women's University


This study is a corpus-based analysis of authenticity of vocabulary used in English textbooks of 2007 Educational Curriculum Revision. The purpose of the study is to examine whether vocabulary used in English textbook is authentic or not. For the study, the texts of four kinds of English textbook by Gwan, O-liang of Kumsung(KS), Kim, Sung-gon of Doosan(DS), Kim Duk-gi of Chunjae(Ch-K), and Lee, Jaeyoung of Chunjae(Ch-L) which are from Middle school to High school were used to compile four corpora. Then, four word lists were made through AntConc 3.2.1w. To achieve the purpose of the study, first, basic word list that is suggested by 2007 Educational Curriculum Revision was compared with BNC(British National Corpus) 100 word list. Second, four word lists of English textbooks were investigated how much they included the basic words of 2007 curriculum. Third, each word list of four English textbooks consist of the most frequent 100 words was compared with BNC 100 word list. In addition, each word list of four English textbooks consist of the most frequent 500 words and 1000 words separately was also compared with BNC 500 and 1000 word list. The results of this study are summarized as follows.
First, the basic word list of 2007 curriculum had most of 100 BNC word list except three or five words. This indicates that the basic word list consist of authentic words.
Second, the reflection rate of basic words of 2007 curriculum which were used in English textbooks was high except a textbook by DS. Except this textbook, the average rate was about 83%.
Third, KS excluded 25 words of BNC 100 word list, DS excluded 26 words of BNC 100 word list, Ch-K excluded 28 words of BNC 100 word list, and Ch-L didn't have 32 words of BNC 100 word list. Moreover, the word lists of four English textbooks didn't include BNC words fully in 500 and 1000 word list. Considering the result of the first which showed that the basic word list included most of BNC 100 word list and the second that indicated the reflection rate of basic words of 2007, these textbooks except DS should have had more words of BNC 100 word list in their 100 word lists. Also, this result means that three textbook used authentic words, but they didn't use those words frequently.
Based on the finding above, this study proposes two points. First, DS needs to reflect the basic words of 2007 curriculum in the textbook. Second, English textbooks need to increase not only the use of authentic words but also the frequency of the use in textbooks.
Author(s)
정혜림
Issued Date
2012
Awarded Date
2012-02
Type
Dissertation
URI
https://repository.sungshin.ac.kr/handle/2025.oak/2344
http://dcollection.sungshin.ac.kr/jsp/common/DcLoOrgPer.jsp?sItemId=000000007118
Alternative Author(s)
Jung, Hye Rim
Affiliation
성신여자대학교 교육대학원
Department
교육대학원 영어교육
Advisor
정소우
Table Of Contents
Ⅰ. 서론 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 1
1.1. 연구의 필요성 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 1
1.2. 연구의 목적 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 4
1.3. 연구의 구성 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 5
1.4. 연구의 제한점 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 6

Ⅱ. 이론적 배경 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 7
2.1. 어휘의 의미와 중요성 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 7
2.2. 어휘의 선정 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 8
2.3. 코퍼스와 코퍼스 언어학 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 10
2.4. 코퍼스의 종류 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 11
2.4.1. Brown Corpus, LOB Corpus ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 11
2.4.2. ICE ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 12
2.4.3. Banck of English ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 12
2.4.4. BNC, ANC, COCA ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 13
2.5. 교과서 어휘 분석에 관한 선행연구 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 14
2.6. 2007년 개정 교육과정 기본 어휘 목록 ‧‧‧‧‧‧ 16

Ⅲ. 연구 방법 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 21
3.1. 연구 대상 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 21
3.2. 연구 도구 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 23
3.3. 연구 절차 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 24
3.4. 어휘의 유형(type)과 구현(token) ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 25
3.5. 어휘의 처리 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 26

Ⅳ. 연구 결과 및 논의 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 28
4.1. 2007년 개정 교육과정 기본 어휘 목록과 BNC 어휘 목록 비교 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 28
4.2. 2007년 개정 교육과정 기본 어휘 반영률 ‧‧‧‧‧‧ 29
4.3. 영어 교과서 어휘와 BNC 어휘 목록 비교 ‧‧‧‧‧ 31
4.3.1. BNC와 금성(권)의 비교 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 41
4.3.2. BNC와 두산(김)의 비교 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 43
4.3.3. BNC와 천재(김)의 비교 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 45
4.3.4. BNC와 천재(이)의 비교 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 48
4.3.5. BNC 최다빈도 어휘 500개와 교과서 최다빈도 어휘 500개 비교 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 51
4.3.6. BNC 최다빈도 어휘 1000개와 교과서 최다빈도 어휘 1000개 비교‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧52

Ⅴ. 결론 및 제언 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 54
참고문헌 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 57
ABSTRACT‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 63
부 록 ‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧‧ 66
Degree
Master
Publisher
성신여자대학교 교육대학원
Appears in Collections:
교육대학원 > 학위논문
공개 및 라이선스
  • 공개 구분공개
  • 엠바고2012-02-27
파일 목록

Items in Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.