• 인문언어
• /
• 제1권2호
• /
• pp.123-139
• /
• 2001

In the history of linguistics in the world the scholars in India could be regarded as the representative linguists, who had provided the cornerstone of the academic development at linguistics. Without looking into the contents of Indian linguistic theories devised and developed in the past it would be almost impossible to account for the origin of descriptive linguistics and historical linguistics. These linguistics trends became full-fledged in 19 and 20 century and are still accepted by a lot of researchers in order to analyze newly revealed languages and train students only coming up the toddling level of linguistic studies. In this paper I will show how far the influence of Indian linguistics has colored the flow of linguistic growth historically. Especially through the analysis of Panini grammar I will prove the intimate relationship between the Indian linguistic theory and the generative grammar - it is the most active theory at present. The methods that Panini applied to constitute the rules like sutra include lots of information, that also could be discovered at the rules postulated in the generative grammar. One of the common features found at both linguistic theories is the simplicity of rule representation. At the generative grammar a rule has to be established without any redundancy. When certain number of sounds like p, b, m show the same phonological. change relevant to lips (labial in linguistic term) different rules need not to be given for each sound separately. It is better to find a way of putting the sounds together in a rule with grouping the 3 sounds with the shared phonetic feature 'labial'. In Panini grammar the form of a rule was decided based on the simplicity, too. For example, sutra 6.1.77 shows the phonological connection between the vowels i, u r 1 and the semi-vowels y, v, r, 1. However, it does not require to postulate 4 individual rules respectively. Instead a rule in which the vowels and the semi-vowels are involved is suggested, and linguistically the rule make it clear that the more simpler the rules will be the better they can reflect the efficiency of human language acquisition. Although the systems introduced at Panini grammar have some sense of distance from the language education itself we cannot deny the fact that the grammar formulates the a turning point of linguistic development. It is essential for us to think over the grammar from the view point of the modem linguistic theories to understand their root and trunk more thoroughly. It will also help us to predict in which way linguistic tendency will proceed to in future.

• 한국어교육
• /
• 제29권1호
• /
• pp.1-23
• /
• 2018

This paper investigates how adult Mandarin- and English- speaking learners of Korean perceive Korean vowels, with focus on the effect of the first language (L1) and the second language (L2) acoustic relationship, as well as the influence of Korean language experience. For this study, native Mandarin and Canadian English speakers who have learned Korean as a foreign language, as well as a control group of native Korean speakers, participated in two experiments. Experiment 1 was designed to examine acoustic similarities between Korean and English vowels, as well as Korean and Mandarin vowels to predict which Korean vowels are relatively easy, or difficult for L2 learners to perceive. The linear discriminant analysis (Klecka, 1980) based on their L1-L2 acoustic similarity predicted that L2 Mandarin learners would have perceptual difficulty rankings for Korean vowels as follows: (the easiest) /i, a, e/ >> /ɨ, ʌ, o, u/ (most difficult), whereas L2 English learners would have perceptual difficulty rankings for Korean vowels as follows: (the easiest) /i, a, e, ɨ, ʌ/ >> /o, u/ (most difficult). The goal of Experiment 2 was to test how accurately L2 Mandarin and English learners perceive Korean vowels /ɨ, ʌ, o, u/ which are considered to be difficult for L2 learners. The results of a mixed-effects logistic model revealed that English listeners showed higher identification accuracy for Korean vowels than Mandarin listeners, indicating that having a larger L1 vowel inventory than the L2 facilitates L2 vowel perception. However, both groups have the same ranking of Korean vowel perceptual difficulty: ɨ > ʌ > u > o. This finding indicates that adult learners of Korean can perceive the new vowel /ɨ/, which does not exist in their L1, more accurately than the vowel /o/, which is acoustically similar to vowels in their L1, suggesting that L2 learners are more likely to establish additional phonetic categories for new vowels. In terms of the influence of experience with L2, it was found that identification accuracy increases as Korean language experience rises. In other words, the more experienced English and Mandarin learners of Korean are, the more likely they are to have better identification accuracy in Korean vowels than less experienced learners of Korean. Moreover, there is no interaction between L1 background and L2 experience, showing that identification accuracy of Korean vowels is higher as Korean language experience increases regardless of their L1 background. Overall, these findings of the two experiments demonstrated that acoustic similarity between L1 and L2 sounds using the LDA model can partially predict perceptual difficulty in L2 acquisition, indicating that other factors such as perceptual similarity between L1 and L2, the merge of Korean /o/ and /u/ may also influence their Korean vowel perception.