토론 담화에 나타난 토론 양상 및 표지어 분석 연구 -제1회 경북 학생 3담꾼(群) 토론대회 군(郡)부 결승전 자료를 바탕으로- (A Study on the Analysis of Debate Type and Marker Emerged during Debate Discourse)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 국어교육학회(since1969)
· 수록지 정보 : 국어교육연구 / 52호 / 29 ~ 54페이지
· 저자명 : 김수정

초록

This research analyzes appearance and makers of debate shown in discussion and conversation based on the data from The 1st Debate Competition of Secondary Students finals held by Gyungbuk Office of Education.
This competition’s debate formation was a public forum debate which was progressed in the order of planning→cross questioning→refuting→cross questioning→summarizing→cross questioning→focusing.
Although the data was from the finals, students were debating without the accurate awareness on the rules of planning, refuting, summarizing, and focusing. Most of their statement was nothing more than an assertion without any logical basis. Moreover, during cross questioning, there was a repetitive statement and content which were digressed from the topic.
For the aspects of discourse markers shown in debate, I divided this into 2; appointed markers of relationship object, regulated markers of relationship type. In case of appointed markers, commanding type and repeating type were the major markers. This carries existing informativeness in terms of rementioning the previous statement. Therefore, this research suggests to educate students with markers of relationship object of ‘listen as you summarize.’ For regulated markers of relationship type, core markers, additional relationship markers, listing markers, comparing and comparison markers, cause and result markers, and problem-solving markers were the main types. This shows aspects of composition aspects of meaning structure by specifying the relationship types established between the subjects. This research carefully suggests to divide regulated markers of relationship type into structure markers, focus markers, and specification markers to structuralize the debate point and then educate in relation to the speaking.
Those debate education conducted during Korean class requires you to concentrate on the ‘language.’ By analyzing debate type, I realized there needs to be an improvement on listening and speaking, which are the 2 key factors. I expect that students get a systemic education on how to effectively listen and speak in debate by using markers and utilize this not only in debate and conversation but also extend it to various locution.

영어초록

This research analyzes appearance and makers of debate shown in discussion and conversation based on the data from The 1st Debate Competition of Secondary Students finals held by Gyungbuk Office of Education.
This competition’s debate formation was a public forum debate which was progressed in the order of planning→cross questioning→refuting→cross questioning→summarizing→cross questioning→focusing.
Although the data was from the finals, students were debating without the accurate awareness on the rules of planning, refuting, summarizing, and focusing. Most of their statement was nothing more than an assertion without any logical basis. Moreover, during cross questioning, there was a repetitive statement and content which were digressed from the topic.
For the aspects of discourse markers shown in debate, I divided this into 2; appointed markers of relationship object, regulated markers of relationship type. In case of appointed markers, commanding type and repeating type were the major markers. This carries existing informativeness in terms of rementioning the previous statement. Therefore, this research suggests to educate students with markers of relationship object of ‘listen as you summarize.’ For regulated markers of relationship type, core markers, additional relationship markers, listing markers, comparing and comparison markers, cause and result markers, and problem-solving markers were the main types. This shows aspects of composition aspects of meaning structure by specifying the relationship types established between the subjects. This research carefully suggests to divide regulated markers of relationship type into structure markers, focus markers, and specification markers to structuralize the debate point and then educate in relation to the speaking.
Those debate education conducted during Korean class requires you to concentrate on the ‘language.’ By analyzing debate type, I realized there needs to be an improvement on listening and speaking, which are the 2 key factors. I expect that students get a systemic education on how to effectively listen and speak in debate by using markers and utilize this not only in debate and conversation but also extend it to various locution.

참고자료

· 없음