本文選題：對(duì)外漢語教學(xué) + 副詞“還”��； 參考：《青島大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：漢語是表意的分析性孤立語,主要靠虛詞和語序表達(dá)語法意義,缺少發(fā)達(dá)的形態(tài)變化。而韓語是表音的黏著語,用緊跟在詞根后的詞尾來表達(dá)相應(yīng)的時(shí)態(tài)和語法意義且有著規(guī)律性的形態(tài)變化。相對(duì)于可丁可卯、各司其職的韓文詞尾,很多漢語中的虛詞在實(shí)詞之間若隱若現(xiàn),卻身兼數(shù)職并擔(dān)負(fù)著更為繁重的語法任務(wù)。副詞“還”就是這類虛詞當(dāng)中的一個(gè),它語義眾多,用法多樣。二語習(xí)得者在使用時(shí)極易將“還”與其相關(guān)近義副詞相混淆而產(chǎn)生各類偏誤。本文專門針對(duì)韓國(guó)學(xué)生,從探討副詞“還”及其相關(guān)中韓近義副詞之間的區(qū)別和聯(lián)系入手,通過問卷調(diào)查和數(shù)據(jù)分析考察韓國(guó)學(xué)生對(duì)“還”類副詞的掌握情況,歸納出偏誤的類型并理清其原因。本文的特點(diǎn)是明確的針對(duì)性,深入、具體且力求條理化,希望對(duì)包括韓國(guó)學(xué)生在內(nèi)的漢語習(xí)得者有所幫助,同時(shí)為對(duì)外漢語教學(xué)的研究和實(shí)踐提供一些借鑒。全文共分為五個(gè)部分。第一部分緒論。內(nèi)容包括選題的緣起和研究意義,國(guó)內(nèi)外(中韓)對(duì)“還”類副詞在本體和漢語教學(xué)兩方面的研究成果綜述。第二部分是關(guān)于本體方面的研究。首先是將副詞“還”及其中韓文中相關(guān)近義副詞相對(duì)照,繪制語義關(guān)系網(wǎng),一目了然。接下來以“還”為綱,將“還”“再”“又”,“還”“也”及“還”“更”作為三個(gè)分支從語義、句法、語用三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行梳理,為接下來的問卷調(diào)查數(shù)據(jù)分析做好鋪墊和準(zhǔn)備。第三部分是通過問卷調(diào)查結(jié)果進(jìn)行偏誤描述和數(shù)據(jù)分析,明確韓國(guó)學(xué)生對(duì)副詞“還”及其相關(guān)近義副詞的掌握情況并進(jìn)行偏誤歸類。此次調(diào)查研究的對(duì)象是青島韓國(guó)國(guó)際學(xué)校中的105名韓國(guó)學(xué)生。第四部分是依據(jù)中介語理論將調(diào)查結(jié)果從“還”“再”“又”,“還”“也”及“還”“更”三個(gè)方面從中韓對(duì)比的角度進(jìn)行細(xì)致的原因探究和分析。第五部分是針對(duì)韓國(guó)學(xué)生的“還”“再”“又”“也”“更”的教案設(shè)計(jì)。最后結(jié)語部分是對(duì)全文的總結(jié),指出了本文的不足之處和對(duì)未來的展望。
[Abstract]:Chinese is an analytical solitary language of ideographic meaning, which mainly relies on function words and word order to express grammatical meaning, and lacks developed morphological changes. Korean is a kind of colloquial language, which expresses the corresponding tense and grammatical meaning with the tail following the root of the word and has regular morphological changes. Compared with Ke Ding Ke Mao, many function words in Chinese appear between notional words, but they both hold several posts and shoulder more heavy grammatical tasks. Adverb "Huanhe" is one of these functional words. Second language learners can easily confuse "return" with their related synonymous adverbs and produce various errors. This paper aims specifically at Korean students, starting with the differences and connections between adverbs "Huanghuan" and their related Chinese and Korean synonymous adverbs, and through questionnaire survey and data analysis to investigate the Korean students' grasp of "Huanghuan" adverbs. Generalize the types of errors and clarify their causes. The characteristics of this paper are clear, in-depth, specific and strive to be organized, hoping to help Chinese learners, including Korean students, and to provide some reference for the research and practice of teaching Chinese as a foreign language. The full text is divided into five parts. The first part is introduction. The content includes the origin and research significance of the topic, and a summary of the domestic and foreign (Chinese and Korean) research on "Huanghua" adverbs in both Noumenon and Chinese teaching. The second part is about the ontology research. The first is to draw the semantic relation network by comparing the adverb "Huanhe" and the relative synonymous adverbs in Chinese and Korean text. Then, taking "return" as the outline, "return" again "," return "also" and "Huanghuan" as three branches, combing them from three aspects of semantics, syntax and pragmatics. For the next questionnaire survey data analysis and preparation. The third part is through the questionnaire survey result carries on the error description and the data analysis, clarifies the Korean student to adverb "return" and the related synonymy adverb grasps the situation and carries on the error classification. The subjects of this study are 105 Korean students in Qingdao Korean International School. In the fourth part, according to the theory of interlanguage, the author explores and analyzes the causes of the investigation from three aspects: "return", "return" and "return" from the angle of contrast between China and South Korea. The fifth part is the teaching plan design of Korean students. The last part of the conclusion is a summary of the full text, pointing out the shortcomings of this paper and the prospects for the future.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：青島大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：H195.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王敏鳳;;頻率副詞“還”、“再”、“又”重復(fù)義之比較[J];語文建設(shè);2015年23期

2 張海鵬;;現(xiàn)代漢語副詞“還”的語義分析[J];赤峰學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(漢文哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2015年01期

3 連惠珊;;泰國(guó)高中生使用漢語重復(fù)副詞“還、再、又、也”與泰語ik/young/khoi/kor的偏誤考查[J];學(xué)周刊;2015年03期

4 段慧玉;;論副詞“還”的語義焦點(diǎn)及語用功能[J];山西煤炭管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2014年02期

5 高順全;;多義副詞“還”的語法化順序和習(xí)得順序[J];華文教學(xué)與研究;2011年02期

6 葉建軍;;疑問副詞“還”溯源[J];安徽大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年01期

7 童小娥;副詞“還”各義項(xiàng)的發(fā)展演變及其語義網(wǎng)絡(luò)系統(tǒng)[J];西南民族大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社科版);2004年08期

8 姜華華;;“再”、“還”、“又”重復(fù)義的比較研究[J];中山大學(xué)研究生學(xué)刊(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年04期

9 李曉琪;;母語為英語者習(xí)得“再”、“又”的考察[J];世界漢語教學(xué);2002年02期

10 沈家煊;;跟副詞“還”有關(guān)的兩個(gè)句式[J];中國(guó)語文;2001年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 陳佳;“更”類副詞的偏誤分析及其對(duì)外漢語教學(xué)研究[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2016年

2 朱喜麗;留學(xué)生“再”、“又”、“還”偏誤調(diào)查及教學(xué)策略研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2015年

3 楊柳;副詞“還”的語義、句法研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2015年

4 申藍(lán);基于HSK動(dòng)態(tài)作文語料庫(kù)副詞“還”的偏誤分析[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

5 王嵩;對(duì)外漢語初級(jí)階段副詞習(xí)得考察與教學(xué)設(shè)計(jì)[D];廈門大學(xué);2014年

6 王睿;對(duì)外漢語副詞“還”、“又”和“更”教學(xué)研究初探[D];蘇州大學(xué);2014年

7 劉小紅;留學(xué)生重復(fù)義副詞“又、再、還、也”的習(xí)得偏誤分析與教學(xué)對(duì)策[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2015年

8 龐慧;單音節(jié)重復(fù)義副詞比較與二語習(xí)得的偏誤分析[D];吉林大學(xué);2013年

9 何榮娟;漢語作為第二語言習(xí)得的常用重復(fù)義副詞研究[D];西北師范大學(xué);2013年

10 金宣教;韓國(guó)留學(xué)生習(xí)得重復(fù)義“還”、“再”、“又”的偏誤分析[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1910982