earticle

영어

The understanding of a text can be separated into superficial and concrete understandings. In this paper, I classify these as primary and secondary understanding, but we can understand that generally the understanding of a presented text ends at the primary level. In this paper, I suggest a method of intertextual understanding for supplementing the understanding of texts. For this purpose, in Part Two, following Bühler’s Organon model, which focuses on the expressive, representation, and conative functions, I give examples to show how he conceptualizes intertexual understanding. According to Bühler’s model, you have to presuppose understanding to enhance the conative function, and to improve understanding, we must take into consideration the cultural (and intertextual) aspects. In Part Three, I present the intertextual elements from Vater’s model of textual understanding. He explains that his “structure and understanding of texts” is on three levels: inquiry, cohesion, and horizon. According to Vater, horizon is the aspect of the text that the text user actually understands, and through horizon, the text user understands the text based on several factors considered when the text was produced. According to this model, one of the important factors to be considered is the intertextual factor. I use the intertextual concepts of textual understanding drawn from these two models in Part Four in an attempt at the intertextual understanding of a German press statement. As a result of this analysis, we have confirmed that the intertextuality of texts is essential to constructing a concrete understanding of press statements. We will have to consider intertextual factors when constructing models of understanding texts in order to get at the concrete and precise understanding of a text.