중국인과 일본인의 한국어 작문 텍스트 대조 분석

Contrastive Analysis of Korean Text Writing of Chinese and Japanese: Focusing on the Text Structure

This study examines written Korean text of Chinese and Japanese students who are learning Korean language using contrastive analysis. With a particular, focus on the text structure chosen by the students, it analyzes the macro-structure of content including the connection and the constructions of the paragraphs to find out the characteristics of the two groups in their Korean writing styles. Among many other types of texts, this study chooses to use argumentative text as 1) argumentative text requires logical thinking of learners and 2) the structure of the text is considered to be more important in this kind of writing than other types of texts. To this date, very few studies have examined the content and construction of a text although many studies have analyzed grammatical errors in a text. Therefore, current study attempts to analyze writing structures which students choose to use in their writing. The results of the study show that the two groups chose appropriate structures of argumentative text. However, each group's choice differed from one another. Whereas numerous Japanese students tend to put general opinions of others followed by their own opinions, Chinese students tend to put their own opinions only followed by supporting evidences. The comparison of the number of the paragraphs in the text revealed that the Chinese students had more awareness of the notion of the paragraph and knew better how to divide paragraphs than the Japanese students. Still many students of the two groups showed difficulties in dividing the paragraphs, which implies that the both groups need education on the construction of paragraph. Although, Japanese students had difficulties in choosing macro-structure and connecting paragraphs. Chinese students seemed to have more difficulties in writing logical evidences within a paragraph than the Japanese students. Furthermore, both groups preferred to start their introduction by using examples related to the main idea of the text. In addition, they attempted to provide a clear outline of the text at the end of their introduction. Finally, both groups tended to reach illogical conclusion.