영어로 논문쓰기레퍼토리 구축 전략 4 가지

2015 년 9 월 23 일경희대학교 경영학과 대학원

김성우

들어가며유학생들의 영어 관련 고민http://slownews.kr/44613

“ 영어 능통자”의 신화1. “ 영어를 잘한다”는 말이 모든 영역의 영어를 잘한다는

의미는 아님 .

2. 이중언어 구사자 (bilingual) 도 통번역을 위해서는 해당 분야의 전문 지식을 집중학습 필요 .

3. 국내 최고의 가수라 하더라도 자기 분야를 벗어난 장르를 소화하기 힘듦 .

“ 영어 능통자”의 신화4. 모국어를 사용하는 사람들도 읽기와 쓰기 , 듣기와

말하기 사이에는 간극이 있음 . 예를 들어 우리가 한국어 뉴스를 거의 100 퍼센트 이해한다고 해도 뉴스 대본을 쓰는 것은 다른 차원의 문제 .

5. 외국어의 경우에는 이해 reception 와 산출 produc-tion 의 간극이 훨씬 큼 .

6. 이 간극을 줄일 수 있는 전략 필요 -> 쓰기학습

“ 영어 쓰기학습”의 함정1. “ 많이 읽고 많이 써야 잘 쓰지”라는 말에서 “많이

읽는다” 혹은 “많이 쓴다”는 것은 구체적으로 어떤 활동을 지칭하는가 ?

2. 업무 영역에서 “일반적 쓰기”라는 것이 존재하는가 ? 다시 말해 , 직장에서 “일반적인 글”을 통해 의사소통하는 일이 있는가 ? 전문 활동 영역에서 우리가 쓰는 글은 특정한 업무와 목적을 위한 것 .

3. “ 쓰기 어떻게 늘려요 ?” 라는 질문에 대한 “많이 읽는 수밖에 없지”라는 대답 .

연구자가 된다는 것은한 분야의 작가가 된다는 뜻이다 .

작가 (Writer) 가 된다는 것은말을 골라 쓴다는 뜻이다 .

표현을 고를 수 있다는 것은 자신만의 레퍼토리 (repertoire) 가

있다는 뜻이다 .

레퍼토리를 만드는 4 가지 방법

레퍼토리 키우기1. 연어 (collocations) 학습을 통한 ‘종적 쓰기능력’ 배양2. 학술영어 표현 (academic expressions) 숙지 3. 분석적 읽기 (analytical reading) 를 통한 표현과 구문 길어올리기 e.g. Reporting verbs, move analysis

4. 세밀하게 읽기 (close reading) 훈련

연어 (Collocation)1. Words that frequently co-occur

2. Strong coffee vs. powerful car / strike a balance

3. Facilitates language comprehension

4. Essential for language production

Useful Books

Collocation Dictionaries

Academic Phrases

http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/

Analytical Reading

1. Reporting verbs2. Grammatical structures3. Move analysis

Leading question: “Can I remember and use these expressions in my own writing?”

This paper examines how social activist tactics affect the diffusion of social-respon-sibility practices. Studying collegiate adoptions of a controversial supplier-sanction practice championed by anti-sweatshop activists, we compare how non-targeted organizations are influenced by different types of practice adoptions in their envi-ronment. Drawing on interorganizational learning theory, we argue and show that disruption-linked adoptions—those that occur following activists’ disruptive protests against the adopting organization—appear to be taken under coercive pressure and therefore provide non-targeted organizations with poor inferences about the merits of the practice. In contrast, strong inferences are provided by evi-dence-linked adoptions—those that occur after activists use evidence-based tactics with the adopting organization—and by independent adoptions occurring without any activism. Hence the contagious effect of independent and evidence-based adoptions is greater than that of disruption-linked adoptions. We further explore differences in receptivity to contagious influence, proposing that features of an or-ganization and its proximal environment that increase issue salience also increase susceptibility to diffusion. Our findings demonstrate the importance of including non-targeted organizations in research on social movements and corporate social responsibility. They also offer a new vantage for interorganizational diffusion re-search, based on how activists and other third parties shape organizational decision makers’ inferences. http://asq.sagepub.com/content/60/2/300.abstract

This paper examines how social activist tactics affect the diffusion of social-re-sponsibility practices. Studying collegiate adoptions of a controversial supplier-sanction practice championed by anti-sweatshop activists, we compare how non-targeted organizations are influenced by different types of practice adoptions in their environment. Drawing on interorganizational learning theory, we argue and show that disruption-linked adoptions—those that occur following activists’ dis-ruptive protests against the adopting organization—appear to be taken under coercive pressure and therefore provide non-targeted organizations with poor in-ferences about the merits of the practice. In contrast, strong inferences are pro-vided by evidence-linked adoptions—those that occur after activists use evi-dence-based tactics with the adopting organization—and by independent adop-tions occurring without any activism. Hence the contagious effect of independent and evidence-based adoptions is greater than that of disruption-linked adop-tions. We further explore differences in receptivity to contagious influence, proposing that features of an organization and its proximal environment that in-crease issue salience also increase susceptibility to diffusion. Our findings demonstrate the importance of including non-targeted organizations in research on social movements and corporate social responsibility. They also offer a new vantage for interorganizational diffusion research, based on how activists and other third parties shape organizational decision makers’ inferences.

This paper examines how social activist tactics affect the diffusion of social-re-sponsibility practices. Studying collegiate adoptions of a controversial supplier-sanction practice championed by anti-sweatshop activists, we compare how non-targeted organizations are influenced by different types of practice adoptions in their environment. Drawing on interorganizational learning theory, we argue and show that disruption-linked adoptions—those that occur following activists’ dis-ruptive protests against the adopting organization—appear to be taken under coercive pressure and therefore provide non-targeted organizations with poor in-ferences about the merits of the practice. In contrast, strong inferences are pro-vided by evidence-linked adoptions—those that occur after activists use evi-dence-based tactics with the adopting organization—and by independent adop-tions occurring without any activism. Hence the contagious effect of independent and evidence-based adoptions is greater than that of disruption-linked adop-tions. We further explore differences in receptivity to contagious influence, proposing that features of an organization and its proximal environment that in-crease issue salience also increase susceptibility to diffusion. Our findings demonstrate the importance of including non-targeted organizations in research on social movements and corporate social responsibility. They also offer a new vantage for interorganizational diffusion research, based on how activists and other third parties shape organizational decision makers’ inferences.

The places in which organizational life occurs can have profound im-pacts on actors, actions, and outcomes but are largely ignored in orga-nizational research. Drawing on ideas from social geography, we ex-plore the roles that places play in institutional work. The context for our study is the domain of housing for the hard-to-house, within which we conducted two qualitative case studies: the establishment of Canada’s first residential and day-care facility for people living with HIV/AIDS, and the creation of a municipal program to provide tempo-rary overnight accommodation for homeless people in local churches. In examining these cases, we found that places played three key roles: places contained, mediated, and complicated institutional work. Each of these roles was associated with a distinct ontology of place: places as social enclosures, as signifiers, and as practical objects. Our findings have significant implications for how we understand the relationship between location and organizations and allow us to develop a process model of places, institutions, and institutional work.http://asq.sagepub.com/content/60/3/371.abstract

The places in which organizational life occurs can have profound im-pacts on actors, actions, and outcomes but are largely ignored in orga-nizational research. Drawing on ideas from social geography, we ex-plore the roles that places play in institutional work. The context for our study is the domain of housing for the hard-to-house, within which we conducted two qualitative case studies: the establishment of Canada’s first residential and day-care facility for people living with HIV/AIDS, and the creation of a municipal program to provide tempo-rary overnight accommodation for homeless people in local churches. In examining these cases, we found that places played three key roles: places contained, mediated, and complicated institutional work. Each of these roles was associated with a distinct ontology of place: places as social enclosures, as signifiers, and as practical objects. Our find-ings have significant implications for how we understand the relation-ship between location and organizations and allow us to develop a process model of places, institutions, and institutional work.

The places in which organizational life occurs can have profound impacts on actors, actions, and outcomes but are largely ignored in organizational re-search. Drawing on ideas from social geography, we explore the roles that places play in institutional work. The context for our study is the domain of housing for the hard-to-house, within which we conducted two qualitative case studies: the establishment of Canada’s first residential and day-care facil-ity for people living with HIV/AIDS, and the creation of a municipal program to provide temporary overnight accommodation for homeless people in local churches. In examining these cases, we found that places played three key roles: places contained, mediated, and complicated institutional work. Each of these roles was associated with a distinct ontology of place: places as social enclosures, as signifiers, and as practical objects. Our findings have significant implications for how we understand the relationship between location and organizations and allow us to develop a process model of places, institutions, and institutional work.

Drawing on fairness heuristic theory and literature on negative group schemas, we develop and empirically test the idea that, given the exact same decision outcome, people perceive groups to be less fair than individuals when they receive a decision outcome that is unfavorable, but not when they receive one that is favorable or neutral (Studies 1 and 2). To account for this difference in fairness perceptions following an unfavorable outcome, we show that the mere presence of a group as a decision-making body serves as a cue that increases the accessibility of negative group-related associations in a perceiver’s mind (Study 3). Moreover, in a sample of recently laid-off workers—representing a broad range of organizations and demographic characteris-tics—we demonstrate that those who received a layoff decision made by a group of decision makers (versus an individual) are marginally more likely to perceive the decision as unfair and are marginally less likely to endorse the organization (Study 4). Taken together, the results of all four studies suggest that, in response to the same unfavorable decision outcome, a group of deci-sion makers is often perceived to be less fair than an individual.http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.2015.0992

Drawing on fairness heuristic theory and literature on negative group schemas, we develop and empirically test the idea that, given the exact same decision outcome, people perceive groups to be less fair than individ-uals when they receive a decision outcome that is unfavorable, but not when they receive one that is favorable or neutral (Studies 1 and 2). To ac-count for this difference in fairness perceptions following an unfavorable outcome, we show that the mere presence of a group as a decision-making body serves as a cue that increases the accessibility of negative group-re-lated associations in a perceiver’s mind (Study 3). Moreover, in a sample of recently laid-off workers—representing a broad range of organizations and demographic characteristics—we demonstrate that those who received a layoff decision made by a group of decision makers (versus an individual) are marginally more likely to perceive the decision as unfair and are marginally less likely to endorse the organization (Study 4). Taken together, the results of all four studies suggest that, in response to the same unfa-vorable decision outcome, a group of decision makers is often perceived to be less fair than an individual.

Drawing on fairness heuristic theory and literature on negative group schemas, we develop and empirically test the idea that, given the exact same decision outcome, people perceive groups to be less fair than individ-uals when they receive a decision outcome that is unfavorable, but not when they receive one that is favorable or neutral (Studies 1 and 2). To ac-count for this difference in fairness perceptions following an unfavorable outcome, we show that the mere presence of a group as a decision-making body serves as a cue that increases the accessibility of negative group-re-lated associations in a perceiver’s mind (Study 3). Moreover, in a sample of recently laid-off workers—representing a broad range of organizations and demographic characteristics—we demonstrate that those who received a layoff decision made by a group of decision makers (versus an individual) are marginally more likely to perceive the decision as unfair and are marginally less likely to endorse the organization (Study 4). Taken together, the results of all four studies suggest that, in response to the same unfavor-able decision outcome, a group of decision makers is often perceived to be less fair than an individual.

연어를 공략하라1. 연어 사전 참조의 생활화2. 동사 + 명사 , 형용사 + 명사 , 명사 + 명사 등의 패턴에 주의하면서 읽기3. 그냥 ‘써내려가는 것’이 아니라 한 자리에 올 수 있는 다양한 표현에 주목할 것4. ‘ 횡적 쓰기’와 ‘종적 쓰기’의 결합

학술표현 : 4 단계 접근법1. 개념화 Conceptualize.

2. 표현 숙지 Memorize generic phrases

3. 전공 예문 쓰기 Adapt to one’s own field of study

4. 논문 작성시 사용 Use in your own research paper.

분석적 읽기1. 보고 동사 Reporting Verbs

http://eslcomposition.osu.edu/index.html

2. Grammatical structure detection

3. Move analysis

세밀하게 읽기Close reading while paying close attention to structural/collocational/rhetorical aspects

1. 소리내어 생각하기 (Think aloud) 를 활용한 ‘세밀하게 읽기’2. 읽으면서 스스로 질문을 던지고 해설3. 생각나는 대로 개념화 - 발화4. 필기 및 하이라이트

Contrary to the assumption of relational inertia that is prevalent in much of the research on organizational change, I propose that in-traorganizational networks are instead subject to transitory shifts when organizational change produces high levels of ambiguity for employees. I develop a theoretical account of how networks de-fined by formal, semiformal, and informal organizational structure change in response to heightened ambiguity. I argue that, when ambiguity increases, people will tend to (1) decrease communica-tion with formal network ties that do not have a significant semi-formal component, (2) increase communication with semiformal network ties that do not have a significant formal component, and (3) increase communication with informal network ties.

http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/orsc.2015.0999

연구 커뮤니티를 위한 제언표현 모으기 협업1. Collocations2. Academic phrases3. Technical terms in management, marketing, OB,

and other related fields4. Close reading sessions (Think aloud)

-> Compilation of useful expressions via online collaboration tools such as Google Docs

결론

연구자가 된다는 것은한 분야의 작가가 된다는 뜻이다 .

작가 (Writer) 가 된다는 것은말을 골라 쓴다는 뜻이다 .

표현을 고를 수 있다는 것은 자신만의 레퍼토리 (repertoire) 가

있다는 뜻이다 .

Develop your identityas a writer.

Build your repertoireevery day.

Make a habit of writing,whether academic or per-

sonal.

Never give up.

질의응답

감사합니다 .