한국어 평가담화의 특징

On Evaluative discourse: Evidence from Korean Language Teachers` Talk

This paper investigates evaluative discourse of Korean language teachers with particular focus on how verbal conflicts are expressed and managed through speakers framing and its representation. Examples from naturally occurring verbal interactions between old-timers and newcomers are presented to illustrate the importance of distinctive discourse natures. The analyses show that experienced teachers and less-experienced ones use their own discourse to prove their accuracy in evaluating learners. Those speakers' arguable four types of disagreement with differing degrees such as irrelevancy claims, challenge, contradiction, and counter claims are identified in the database. Comparison between the teachers reveals that old-timers draw on narratives, while newcomers use opinions. Old-timers more tend to focus on holistic approach for their students through zooming-in and out their experiences. Contrariwise, newcomers use opinions as a chance to represent challenge to their experienced colleague, aligning the meanings of their gradable utterances. The analysis (1) suggests that a nest of conflicts point to teacher-salient discourse activities; (2) revels both old-timers and new-comers to be proficient in handling conflicts between them; (3) especially proposes a clue for providing effective Korean language assessment.