El sistema verbal en español no solo expresa el tiempo sino tambiénel aspecto y el modo a través de diversas conjugaciones, por consiguiente, es un sistema muy difícil de adquirir para los alumnos coreanos. En este artículo, desde el punto de vista de gramática pedagógica hemos propuesto unas medidas de instrucción basadas en la gramática cognitiva que puedan aplicarse en el aula. En primer lugar, es útil presentar el esquema cognitivo de varios tiempos verbales en una imagen. En segundo lugar, la perfectividad es una propiedad importante en el tiempo pasado español, mientras que la probabilidad es importante en el tiempo futuro. En tercer lugar, los grados de probabilidad pueden clasificarse como conjeturas o hipótesis y se representan por los tiempos futuros de indicativo como el futuro simple, el futuro perfecto, el condicional simple y el condicional perfecto en las oraciones principales, así como los tiempos de subjuntivo en las oraciones subordinadas. Finalmente, es necesario tener en cuenta que el modo subjuntivo refleja la actitud no asertiva del hablante a nivel pragmático, una construcción que no se realiza en coreano sintácticamente.

In an effort to find a way to optimize the learning condition, this study examined the effects of two types of input frequency distribution, skewed-first distribution (SFD) versus balanced distribution (BD), and two types of focus-on-form techniques, input processing (IP) versus input enhancement (IE), on the learning of English participles by Korean middle school students. A total of 91 students participated in this study, divided into five subgroups: SFD + IP, SFD + IE, BD + IP, BD + IE, and Control. The learning outcomes and the generalizability of the learned knowledge were measured through scaled judgment tasks and picture description tasks, immediately after treatment as well as one week later. The results showed that the input frequency distribution factor did not have statistically significant effects on learning and generalizability, while the degrees of explicitness of focus-on-form techniques had statistically significant effects on both. The interaction effects of the two main factors were not statistically significant. More detailed findings are presented with some pedagogical implications for Korean EFL classrooms.

정보통신 기술의 발전과 더불어 기계번역, 음성인식, 언어자료 데이터베이스(DB) 구축 등 언어처리 시스템의 실현에 있어서 자연언어처리(NLP)의 중요성이 커지고 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 한·중 문법구조 대응 방법에 대한 자연언어처리의 정확도를 높이기 위한 방법을 모색하고자 ‘있다’에 대응하는 중국어 단어인 ‘有，在，着’를 중심으로 한국어와 중국어의 대응 구조를 분석하였다. 이와 관련하여 한국인 중국어 학습자들이 자주 범하는 오류 유형에 대해 Google 번역을 시도하고 그 결과를 분석하여 오류를 수정·보완할 수 있는 해결 방안을 제시 하였다. 본 연구가 한국어와 중국어를 위한 전산시스템을 구축하는 데 도움이 되길 기대한다.

This study aims to investigate the effect of DDL on English lexico-grammar learning by Korean middle school students with respect to the types of learning approach (deductive vs. inductive DDL), the student’s level of English (low vs. high level), and the complexity of lexico-grammar items (simple vs. complex). A total of five experimental lessons were given to 36 students divided into two groups: one group received the lessons through the deductive DDL approach and the other group through the inductive DDL approach. The study found that both inductive and deductive DDL were effective in the learning of English lexico-grammar by the Korean middle school students. However, deductive DDL was more effective for the high level students, while inductive DDL was more appropriate for low level students. In addition, both deductive and inductive DDL were effective for teaching simple lexico-grammar items, but deductive DDL was more effective for teaching complex ones. Most of the participants showed positive responses about DDL and expressed a view that they were able to learn the meanings as well as the forms of target lexico-grammar items.

Quand on apprend une languε 하rangère ， il est reconnu que le système de la languε matεmεIIε constitue toujours pour l'apprεnant de langue étrangère un P이ot de repère fondamental. Cela signifie que 10rs de 1’εnsεignement d’une languε étrangère, iI faut tenir compte de cε qui existe déjà chez 1’ appren때t， à savoir la langue matemelle, et y 5Upεrposer une nouvεIIε pratique et connaissances. Aussi, compte tεnu dε l’importance de la langue maκmelle ， cette étudε consiste à proposer l'enseignεmεot de la grammaire française pour des apprenants coréens portant sur la contrastivité métalinguistiquε entre le français εt Iε coréen. Pour ce faire, notrε intérêt est centré sur les tεrmεs grammaticaux qUi ne constituent qu’une partie du rnétalangagε gramrnatical. En particulier, nous prεnons ici pour exernplε le complémζnt d’objet indirect qui est trζs révélateur de cεttε différence ζntre la terrninologiε grammaticale coréenne et cε11ε française. Ce qui va montrer la nécessité de tenir compte des différences métalinguistiques commençant par la terminologie grammaticale pour renouveler les descriptions grammaticales d헤 à existantes.

"You may not agree with Chomsky`s work, but it would be both short-sighted and unscholarly to ignore it." (Smith 2000:vi) Sung-Hyuk Park. 2002. Chomsky`s Conception of Language and Grammar. Studies in Modern Grammar 31, 25-46. Chomsky`s views on human language and the nature of linguistic inquiry are very widely referred to, but equally widely misrepresented. Such widespread misunderstanding of Chomsky`s linguistic ideas seem, especially in Korea, to be due in part to misinterpretation of his conception of language and grammar. The purpose of this paper is to reexamine Chomsky`s conception of language and grammar with a view to helping Korean critics of Chomskyan theory understand it in a reasonable manner. According to Chomsky, "there is a faculty of language FL, a component of the human mind/brain dedicated to language," and "FL undergoes state changes under triggering and shaping influences of the environment." The most important and basic assumption of Chomskyan theory is the internalist conception of knowledge of a language, according to which such knowledge is constituted solely as part of the psychology of individuals. This special notion is accordingly referred to as "I-language," where I is to suggest "individual," "internal," and "intensional." The notion of language that is being investigated is the language of an individual (I-language), not the language of a community or a country or an era. An I-language L is thus defined as the language of an individual whose FL is in a state L (S?). The notion of grammar should then be conceived of in the same vein: the term "grammar" is the linguist`s theory of the I-language, universal grammar (UG) being the theory of the initial state S? of FL, which is uniform for the species.