제2언어교육 맥락에서 대화함축의 이론적 쟁점

초록

In this study, the theoretical issues on the interface between semantics and pragmatics that have arisen over the generalized conversational implicatures are identified, and how these theories are applied and influenced in the field of pragmatics of second language education. In the traditional Grice‘s semantic model, ‘what is said’ is regarded as the level of semantics and implicature as the level of pragmatics. However, the problem Levinson (2000) calls Grice's circle raises questions about the boundary between semantics and pragmatics. Grice's model explains that 'what is said' is the combination of the sum of the constituent elements of a sentence and the interpretation of the contextual elements. However, as pointed out by Levinson (2000), the process of determining the contextual factor has to include a process of pragmatic reasoning, which is similar to the process of fundamentally determining the implicature. Moreover, there is a lot of evidence that the implicature that has been considered separate from what is said are involved in the interpretation of what is said. There are two representative theories that suggest alternatives to Grice's model. Among them, the Default theory tried to solve the problem of the Grice’s model by introducing pragmatic reasoning, that is, implicature, as a default value in the realm of semantics, and by Theory. There are various research cases of experimental pragmatics to determine the superiority and inferiority of the two theories, focusing on the interpretation of scalar implicature. In the study of the first language, there are generally many cases that support the claim of the Relevance Theory. Meanwhile, studies suggesting the superiority of the Default Theory are emerging in second language research. However, a careful approach is required because the implicature research centered on the second language is just beginning.

키워드