패러다임의 변화와 문법교육 내용의 확장 - 전경과 배경을 중심으로 -

초록

This study aims to discuss paradigm shifts and the restructuring of grammar education content by categorizing the paradigms of grammar education that have significantly influenced Korean grammar education into formalism and functionalism. It further examines these paradigm shifts by contrasting Systemic Functional Linguistics and Cognitive Linguistics within functionalist linguistics. Furthermore, examining this paradigm shift at the level of objectives, we sought to determine whether the paradigm shift is being fully realized in grammar education content by distinguishing between foregrounded and backgrounded elements within the grammar education content that embodies this paradigm shift. Through this discussion process, we found the following. First, the grammar education paradigm has evolved from ‘accuracy of individual knowledge (formalism) → appropriateness within discourse context (functionalism) → reflection through connection to life (integralism)’. Particularly in the 2022 revision, it combines formalistic inquiry and functionalistic reflection in their most advanced form through elements like ‘language life exploration’. Second, whereas past curricula juxtaposed ‘understanding’ and ‘application,’ the 2022 revision organically integrates these two paradigms through a causal structure of ‘reflection’ achieved via ‘exploration.’ This demonstrates that grammar education, moving beyond merely teaching rules, supports the functionalist aspiration to establish learners as active ‘language agents’ through formalistic inquiry methodology. Third, the 2022 revised curriculum aimed for ‘enhancing composition through analysis’. As the phrase ‘enhancing composition through analysis’ suggests, analysis dominated most of the curriculum. Then, how does ‘understanding grammatical elements’ connect to ‘selecting vocabulary and grammatical elements appropriate to the discourse context’? We observed an excessive focus on ‘sentence analysis’ rather than concentrating on ‘sentence construction’ issues. At this point, we saw potential for the functional and practical grammar (education) characteristics of North Korea to contribute to the content of grammar education in South Korea. Unlike the general grammar (education) discourse in the South, which, from a formal syntactic perspective, treats only systemic sentences (complete sentences) as objects of description, Chinese and North Korean grammar (education) adopts a functional syntactic perspective, treating usage sentences (complete and small sentences) as objects of grammatical description. This difference manifests as a difference in the description of grammatical content. From the functional syntactic perspective, both full sentences and small sentences are considered objects of grammatical description. Consequently, the omission and overlap of sentence constituents, which actively occur in actual language use, are also addressed. However, these are currently not covered in the grammar education content of the South. However, this study argues that grammar education content linked to actual language use should be included. It proposes the possibility of incorporating ‘subject omission’ and ‘repetitive constituents (repetitive words, generalizing words)’ as specific grammar education content in Korean language instruction.

키워드