用你的语言查看此页面
English فارسی العربية Deutsch Español Français 日本語 한국어 Português हिन्दी
B2 noun #4,800 最常用 9分钟阅读

쟁점

jaengjeom
开始练习 例句 笔记与提示 쟁점 30秒了解
解析 쟁점 in your Level:
At the A1 level, learners are just beginning to acquire basic vocabulary. Words like "쟁점" are far beyond their scope. Explaining it would involve complex sentence structures and abstract concepts that are not relevant to their immediate learning needs. The focus at A1 is on survival phrases, greetings, and very common nouns and verbs related to immediate surroundings and personal information. Introducing "쟁점" would be overwhelming and unproductive, as it requires understanding of debate, disagreement, and complex issues. Instead, A1 learners focus on fundamental communication skills and a limited set of high-frequency words essential for basic interaction.
免费注册阅读完整解释
For A2 learners, the vocabulary is still quite basic, focusing on everyday situations and simple descriptions. "쟁점" is a word that deals with abstract concepts like disagreement, debate, and core issues, which are typically beyond the A2 level of understanding. A2 learners are building their ability to describe simple experiences, express opinions on familiar topics, and understand straightforward information. The concept of a "central point of disagreement" in a formal or complex discussion is too abstract. Therefore, explanations for A2 would not include "쟁점," as it falls outside their current linguistic and cognitive grasp. Their learning focuses on more concrete and frequently used vocabulary.
免费注册阅读完整解释
At the B1 level, learners can understand the main points of clear standard input on familiar matters regularly encountered in work, school, leisure, etc. They can produce simple connected text on topics which are familiar or of personal interest. While "쟁점" is a B2 word, a B1 learner might encounter it in context and try to infer its meaning. An explanation for a B1 learner would need to simplify the concept, focusing on the idea of a "main problem" or "main disagreement" in a discussion. It would avoid highly formal or legalistic language and use simpler sentence structures. The focus would be on understanding the core idea of a debated point, perhaps using analogies they can relate to, like a disagreement among friends about a plan. The explanation would be more about the general idea of a difficult point in a discussion rather than its specific formal applications.
免费注册阅读完整解释
At the B2 level, learners can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussions in their field of specialization. They can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. "쟁점" is a B2 word, and explanations at this level can delve into its nuances. The definition would clearly state its meaning as a central point of disagreement or the core issue in a debate, lawsuit, or argument. Examples would be more sophisticated, reflecting its use in news, politics, law, and academia. The explanation would also touch upon its formal register and distinguish it from more general terms like "problem" or "topic." Learners at this level are expected to grasp the context-dependent nature of the word and its significance in structured discussions.
C1 learners can understand a wide range of demanding, longer texts, and recognize implicit meaning. They can express themselves fluently and spontaneously without much obvious searching for expressions. The explanation of "쟁점" for a C1 learner can be highly detailed, exploring its etymological roots, its subtle differences from similar words, and its precise application in various sophisticated contexts. It would cover its use in nuanced legal arguments, complex academic debates, and critical analysis of societal issues. The explanation would also highlight the connotations of the word, such as its implication of a significant, often complex, point that requires resolution or deep understanding. Learners at this level can appreciate the precise semantic weight and pragmatic function of the word.
免费注册阅读完整解释
C2 learners have an "all forms of spoken and written information like a native speaker." Explanations for C2 learners would be minimal, perhaps focusing on highly specialized or archaic uses, or comparative linguistic analysis with other languages. For a word like "쟁점," which is already well-defined at C1, the C2 explanation might focus on its subtle idiomatic uses, its historical evolution, or its role in specific professional jargon where its meaning might be further refined. It would assume a complete understanding of the core definition and focus on the most advanced aspects of its usage, potentially in comparative linguistics or advanced discourse analysis.
免费注册阅读完整解释
开始练习 例句 笔记与提示

쟁점 30秒了解

  • The main point of disagreement in a discussion or argument.
  • The core issue being debated, often in formal contexts like law or politics.
  • The central problem or question that divides opinions.
  • The crux of a matter where different perspectives clash.
Core Meaning
The Korean word "쟁점" (jaengjeom) refers to the central point of contention, the main issue, or the core problem that is being debated or discussed. It's the crux of an argument or a disagreement, where different parties have opposing views or interests. Think of it as the focal point of a conflict or a significant discussion where resolution is sought or understanding is deepened.
Usage in Different Contexts
You'll frequently encounter "쟁점" in formal settings like legal proceedings, political debates, academic discussions, and even in news reporting. For instance, in a court case, the "쟁점" would be the specific legal question that the judge or jury needs to decide. In politics, it's the key policy difference between parties. Academically, it's the main hypothesis or theory being challenged. It can also be used in more everyday discussions, though perhaps with less intensity, to refer to the main point of disagreement in a personal argument or a group project.
Nuance and Connotation
The word carries a sense of importance and often complexity. It implies that the issue at hand is not trivial but rather a significant hurdle or a crucial element that needs to be addressed. It suggests that there are differing perspectives and that resolving or understanding this "쟁점" is key to moving forward in the discussion or resolving the conflict. It's not just a minor detail; it's the heart of the matter.

The economic policy shift became a major 쟁점 in the upcoming election.

The legal team focused on clarifying the 쟁점 of the case.

Related Concepts
"쟁점" is closely related to concepts like 'issue', 'point of contention', 'dispute', 'matter', and 'controversy'. However, "쟁점" often implies a more focused and central aspect of these broader terms, particularly in structured discussions or legal/academic contexts. It's the specific question or problem that needs to be resolved or understood for progress to be made.

Environmental protection remains a significant 쟁점 in international climate talks.

Formal Discussions and Debates
In formal settings, "쟁점" is used to pinpoint the critical aspects of a debate or discussion. For example, during a political debate, a moderator might say, "오늘 토론의 주요 쟁점은 경제 성장과 환경 보호입니다." (O-neul to-ron-ui ju-yo jaengjeom-eun gyeongje-sangjang-gwa hwan-gyeong bo-ho-im-ni-da.) - "The main points of contention in today's debate are economic growth and environmental protection." This highlights the core issues that will be addressed. Similarly, in academic conferences, researchers might present papers focusing on specific "쟁점" within their field, such as the "쟁점" of artificial intelligence ethics or the "쟁점" of quantum computing's practical applications.
Legal and Judicial Contexts
In legal contexts, "쟁점" refers to the specific legal questions that are in dispute and must be decided by a court. A lawyer might argue, "우리 측은 이 사건의 핵심 쟁점을 명확히 밝혀야 합니다." (U-ri cheug-eun i sa-geon-ui haeksim jaengjeom-eul myeong-hwak-hi balk-hyeo-ya ham-ni-da.) - "Our side must clearly state the core issues of this case." This emphasizes the crucial points that will determine the outcome of the lawsuit. News reports often use this term when summarizing legal battles, identifying the "쟁점" that are being litigated.
News Reporting and Media
Journalists frequently use "쟁점" to summarize complex issues for the public. An article might state, "이번 사회적 논란의 쟁점은 시민들의 안전과 개인 정보 보호 사이의 균형입니다." (I-beon sahoe-jeok non-ran-ui jaengjeom-eun simin-deul-ui an-jeon-gwa gaein jeongbo bo-ho sa-i-ui gyun-hyeong-im-ni-da.) - "The core issue of this social controversy is the balance between citizens' safety and personal information protection." This helps readers quickly grasp the central conflict.
Academic and Research Papers
In academic writing, "쟁점" is used to identify the key problems or debates within a particular field of study. A research paper might begin by outlining, "본 연구는 기존 이론의 주요 쟁점을 비판적으로 검토합니다." (Bon yeon-gu-neun gi-jon i-ron-ui ju-yo jaengjeom-eul bi-pan-jeok-eu-ro geom-to-ham-ni-da.) - "This study critically examines the main points of contention in existing theories." This sets the stage for the paper's investigation and argument.
Everyday Discussions (with caution)
While "쟁점" is often formal, it can be used in more casual settings to highlight the main point of disagreement, though it might sound slightly more serious than just saying "the problem." For example, friends discussing a movie might say, "우리 영화의 가장 큰 쟁점은 결말의 개연성이었어." (U-ri yeonghwa-ui ga-jang keun jaengjeom-eun gyeol-mal-ui gae-yeon-seong-i-eoss-eo.) - "The biggest point of contention about our movie was the plausibility of the ending." In such cases, it emphasizes that this was the most significant aspect they disagreed on.
News Broadcasts and Political Commentary
News anchors and political analysts frequently use "쟁점" when discussing current events, elections, and policy debates. You'll hear it when they summarize the key disagreements between political parties or the central issues facing the government. For example, a news report might say, "정부의 새로운 부동산 정책을 둘러싼 쟁점이 무엇인지 살펴보겠습니다." (Jeongbu-ui saeroun budongsan jeongchaeg-eul dulleossan jaengjeom-i mu-eot-inji sal-pyeo-bo-get-seum-ni-da.) - "Let's examine what the points of contention are surrounding the government's new real estate policy." This is a very common context.
Courtroom Dramas and Legal Documentaries
In legal settings, whether in real life or in fictional portrayals, "쟁점" is crucial. Lawyers will discuss the "쟁점" of a case, and judges will rule on the "쟁점" to be considered. You might hear a lawyer arguing, "본 재판의 가장 중요한 쟁점은 증거의 신빙성입니다." (Bon jaepan-ui ga-jang jung-yo-han jaengjeom-eun jeunggeo-ui sinbingseong-im-ni-da.) - "The most important point of contention in this trial is the credibility of the evidence." This word is central to legal discourse.
Academic Lectures and Seminars
University professors and researchers use "쟁점" when introducing complex topics or presenting their research. They might frame a lecture by saying, "오늘 우리는 이 분야의 주요 쟁점들을 탐구할 것입니다." (O-neul u-ri-neun i bunya-ui ju-yo jaengjeom-deul-eul tam-gu-hal geot-im-ni-da.) - "Today, we will explore the major points of contention in this field." This helps students understand the critical areas of debate within the subject matter.
Societal Discussions and Opinion Pieces
When society is grappling with a controversial issue, "쟁점" will be used to identify the core disagreements. Opinion pieces in newspapers or online forums might discuss, "최근 사회적 이슈가 되고 있는 이 문제의 쟁점은 무엇인가?" (Choegeun sahoe-jeok i-syu-ga doe-go itneun i munje-ui jaengjeom-eun mu-eot-in-ga?) - "What are the points of contention in this issue that has recently become a social topic?" This helps to frame the public debate.
Business and Policy Meetings
In professional settings, particularly when discussing strategy, disputes, or the implementation of new policies, "쟁점" can be used to highlight the critical challenges or disagreements that need to be resolved for the project or policy to succeed. A manager might say, "이번 프로젝트의 성공을 위해 반드시 해결해야 할 쟁점들이 있습니다." (I-beon peuro-jek-teu-ui seong-gong-eul wi-hae ban-deu-si hae-gyeol-hae-ya hal jaengjeom-deul-i iss-seum-ni-da.) - "There are points of contention that must be resolved for the success of this project." This indicates areas requiring focused attention and resolution.
Confusing "쟁점" with General Problems or Topics
A common mistake is to use "쟁점" when simply referring to any general problem or topic. "쟁점" specifically implies a point of *disagreement* or *contention*. If you're just talking about a topic for discussion without any conflict, other words like '주제' (juje - topic) or '문제' (munje - problem) might be more appropriate. For example, saying "이것은 우리의 쟁점입니다" (This is our point of contention) when you mean "This is our topic" would be inaccurate. It should be used when there's a clear difference of opinion or a specific issue being debated.
Overusing "쟁점" in Casual Conversation
While "쟁점" can be used in informal contexts, it often carries a more formal or serious tone. Using it excessively in very casual conversations might sound a bit stiff or overly dramatic. For instance, when friends are lightheartedly discussing where to eat, calling the choice of restaurant a "쟁점" might be an exaggeration. More common words like '의견 차이' (uigyeon chai - difference of opinion) or simply describing the disagreement would be more natural.
Not Specifying the "쟁점" Clearly
When using "쟁점," it's important to be specific about what that point of contention is. Simply stating "There are many 쟁점" is less informative than specifying what those "쟁점" are. For example, instead of saying "이 논의에는 여러 쟁점이 있습니다" (There are many points of contention in this discussion), it's better to say, "이 논의의 주요 쟁점은 예산 분배와 책임 소재입니다" (The main points of contention in this discussion are budget allocation and accountability).
Confusing "쟁점" with "논점" (Nonjeom)
While "쟁점" and "논점" (nonjeom) are related, they have slightly different nuances. "논점" refers to a point of argument or a key topic in a discussion or debate, often from a more neutral or analytical perspective. "쟁점" specifically emphasizes the *disagreement* or *conflict* surrounding that point. While a "논점" can become a "쟁점" if there's contention, not all "논점" are "쟁점." Using "쟁점" when the point is simply being discussed without conflict would be a slight misapplication.
쟁점 (Jaengjeom)
Meaning: The central point of disagreement, the core issue being debated.
논점 (Nonjeom)
Meaning: A point of argument, a key topic in a discussion or debate, often more neutral.
Comparison: While "쟁점" highlights conflict, "논점" can be a point of discussion without necessarily being contentious. A "논점" becomes a "쟁점" when there's a clear disagreement about it.
Example: "이 논문의 주요 논점은 A입니다." (The main point of argument in this paper is A.) vs. "두 나라 사이의 쟁점은 국경선 문제입니다." (The point of contention between the two countries is the border issue.)
이슈 (Issue)
Meaning: A topic or problem that is being discussed or dealt with, often borrowed from English.
Comparison: "이슈" is a broader term and can be used more casually than "쟁점." It often refers to a current topic of public concern. "쟁점" is more specific to the point of disagreement within an issue.
Example: "환경 보호는 중요한 사회적 이슈입니다." (Environmental protection is an important social issue.) vs. "그 법안의 가장 큰 쟁점은 재정적 부담입니다." (The biggest point of contention regarding that bill is the financial burden.)
문제 (Munje)
Meaning: A problem, a question, or an issue.
Comparison: "문제" is a very general term for a problem. "쟁점" is a specific type of problem that involves disagreement or contention. You can have a "문제" that is not a "쟁점," but a "쟁점" is always a "문제."
Example: "이 프로젝트에는 몇 가지 문제가 있습니다." (There are a few problems with this project.) vs. "두 팀 간의 주요 쟁점은 업무 분담입니다." (The main point of contention between the two teams is work distribution.)
갈등 (Galdeung)
Meaning: Conflict, discord, friction.
Comparison: "갈등" refers to the state of conflict itself, while "쟁점" refers to the specific issue that *causes* the conflict. You can have "갈등" arising from a "쟁점."
Example: "그들의 갈등은 해결되지 않았습니다." (Their conflict was not resolved.) vs. "그 갈등의 쟁점은 과거의 오해입니다." (The point of contention in that conflict is a past misunderstanding.)
핵심 (Haeksim)
Meaning: Core, nucleus, key point.
Comparison: "핵심" means the central or most important part. When used with "쟁점," as in "핵심 쟁점" (haeksim jaengjeom), it emphasizes the most crucial point of contention. "핵심" itself doesn't imply disagreement.
Example: "이 문제의 핵심은 무엇인가?" (What is the core of this problem?) vs. "회의의 핵심 쟁점은 예산 삭감입니다." (The core point of contention in the meeting is budget cuts.)

How Formal Is It?

趣味小知识

The character 爭 (쟁) itself visually depicts two people (two '八' shapes) pulling on a central object (the middle '一' stroke), symbolizing a struggle or dispute over something. This visual representation perfectly captures the essence of a '쟁점' as a contested point.

发音指南

UK /d͡ʑɛŋ.t͡ɕʌm/
US /d͡ʒɛŋ.t͡ɕʌm/
First syllable (쟁)
押韵词
점 (jeom) 덤 (deom) 봄 (bom) 꿈 (kkum) 춤 (chum) 폼 (pom) 함 (ham) 밤 (bam)
常见错误
  • Pronouncing the initial 'ㅈ' as a hard 'g' or a soft 's'.
  • Not correctly articulating the affricate sound of 'ㅈ'.
  • Mispronouncing the vowel 'ㅔ' as a longer 'ee' sound.
  • Adding an unnecessary vowel sound after the final 'ㅁ'.

难度评级

阅读 4/5

At the B2 level, learners can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics. '쟁점' typically appears in contexts that require understanding of debate, legal matters, or political discussions, which are common at this level. The abstract nature of 'point of contention' is manageable with context.

写作 4/5

B2 learners should be able to use '쟁점' appropriately in writing when discussing issues, arguments, or debates. The challenge lies in selecting the correct contexts and ensuring the nuance of disagreement is conveyed.

口语 4/5

Speaking requires quick recall and appropriate contextual usage. B2 learners can engage in discussions about complex topics and use '쟁점' to articulate points of disagreement, though fluency might vary.

听力 4/5

Understanding '쟁점' in spoken Korean requires familiarity with formal discussions, news reports, or debates. B2 learners are typically exposed to such content and can identify the core issues being discussed.

接下来学什么

前置知识

문제 (munje - problem) 이슈 (isyu - issue) 논의 (nonui - discussion) 토론 (toron - debate) 의견 (uigyeon - opinion)

接下来学习

논점 (nonjeom - point of argument) 쟁점화하다 (jaengjeomhwahada - to make an issue) 첨예하다 (cheom-yehada - to be sharp/acute, often used with 쟁점)

高级

법리 (beomri - legal principles) 담론 (damnon - discourse) 이해관계 (ihae-gwangye - interests)

需要掌握的语法

Use of particles like '은/는' and '이/가' to mark the subject or topic of a sentence discussing a 쟁점.

그 문제는 중요한 쟁점입니다. (That problem is an important point of contention.) - '그 문제' is the topic.

Using verbs that indicate conflict or discussion when talking about 쟁점, such as '논의하다' (to discuss), '제기하다' (to raise), '해결하다' (to solve), '야기하다' (to cause).

그들은 쟁점을 논의했습니다. (They discussed the points of contention.)

Adjective modification of 쟁점 (e.g., 주요, 핵심, 법적, 사회적).

이것은 주요 쟁점입니다. (This is a main point of contention.)

The use of '-기 때문에' or '-어서/아서' to explain the reason behind a 쟁점.

그들의 입장 차이 때문에 쟁점이 발생했습니다. (A point of contention arose because of their difference in stance.)

Sentence endings like '-입니다', '-습니다' for formal contexts, and '-어요/아요' for polite informal contexts when discussing 쟁점.

이것은 심각한 쟁점입니다. (This is a serious point of contention.)

免费注册阅读完整解释

按水平分级的例句

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

1

이 문제는 우리가 해결해야 할 중요한 쟁점입니다.

This problem is an important point of contention that we must resolve.

'중요한' (important) modifies '쟁점' (point of contention). The sentence structure highlights '쟁점' as the object of resolution.

2

그들의 의견 차이는 토론의 쟁점이 되었습니다.

Their difference of opinion became the point of contention in the discussion.

'토론의 쟁점' (point of contention of the discussion) is a common phrase. The past tense '되었습니다' (became) is used.

3

그 법안의 쟁점은 세금 인상입니다.

The point of contention in that bill is the tax increase.

'법안의 쟁점' (point of contention of the bill) is a typical construction. '세금 인상' (tax increase) is the specific issue.

4

우리는 이 프로젝트의 주요 쟁점을 논의해야 합니다.

We need to discuss the main points of contention of this project.

'주요 쟁점' (main point of contention) emphasizes the most critical issues. '논의해야 합니다' (need to discuss) indicates an action required.

5

환경 규제 강화가 새로운 쟁점으로 떠올랐습니다.

Strengthening environmental regulations has emerged as a new point of contention.

'쟁점으로 떠올랐습니다' (emerged as a point of contention) is a common idiomatic expression. '환경 규제 강화' (strengthening environmental regulations) is the subject.

6

서로 다른 이해관계가 쟁점을 만들었습니다.

Differing interests created the point of contention.

'쟁점을 만들었습니다' (created the point of contention) shows cause and effect. '이해관계' (interests) is a key term.

7

그 회의의 쟁점은 예산 배분 문제였습니다.

The point of contention in that meeting was the budget allocation problem.

'회의의 쟁점' (point of contention of the meeting) is a common phrase. '예산 배분 문제' (budget allocation problem) specifies the issue.

8

이 사안의 쟁점을 명확히 이해하는 것이 중요합니다.

It is important to clearly understand the point of contention in this matter.

'쟁점을 명확히 이해하는 것' (clearly understanding the point of contention) highlights the cognitive aspect.

1

그 정치인의 발언은 심각한 사회적 쟁점을 야기했습니다.

The politician's remarks caused serious social points of contention.

'쟁점을 야기했습니다' (caused points of contention) is a common collocation. '심각한 사회적' (serious social) modifies '쟁점'.

2

이번 협상에서 가장 큰 쟁점은 계약 기간입니다.

The biggest point of contention in this negotiation is the contract period.

'협상에서' (in the negotiation) sets the context. '가장 큰 쟁점' (biggest point of contention) emphasizes its importance.

3

학계에서는 이 이론의 타당성에 대한 쟁점이 계속 제기되고 있습니다.

In academic circles, points of contention regarding the validity of this theory are continuously being raised.

'학계에서는' (in academic circles) specifies the domain. '쟁점이 계속 제기되고 있습니다' (points of contention are continuously being raised) is a formal phrasing.

4

법원은 사건의 핵심 쟁점을 명확히 규명해야 합니다.

The court must clearly identify the core points of contention of the case.

'법원은' (the court) indicates the actor. '핵심 쟁점' (core point of contention) is a strong emphasis. '규명해야 합니다' (must identify/clarify) is a formal verb.

5

두 국가 간의 영토 분쟁은 오랜 쟁점이 되어왔습니다.

The territorial dispute between the two countries has been a long-standing point of contention.

'영토 분쟁' (territorial dispute) is a specific type of conflict. '오랜 쟁점이 되어왔습니다' (has been a long-standing point of contention) indicates historical significance.

6

미디어는 이 사회적 문제의 다양한 쟁점을 조명하고 있습니다.

The media is highlighting the various points of contention of this social issue.

'미디어는' (the media) is the subject. '다양한 쟁점' (various points of contention) suggests complexity. '조명하고 있습니다' (is highlighting) is a common verb for media coverage.

7

그 결정이 가져올 쟁점들을 미리 예측하는 것이 중요합니다.

It is important to predict in advance the points of contention that the decision will bring.

'쟁점들을 미리 예측하는 것' (predicting the points of contention in advance) emphasizes foresight. '가져올' (will bring) indicates future consequences.

8

이 이슈의 복잡한 쟁점들을 단순화하여 설명해 드리겠습니다.

I will simplify and explain the complex points of contention of this issue.

'복잡한 쟁점들' (complex points of contention) highlights the difficulty. '단순화하여 설명해 드리겠습니다' (will simplify and explain) is a helpful phrase for learners.

1

이 사안의 근본적인 쟁점은 사회적 불평등의 심화에 있습니다.

The fundamental point of contention in this matter lies in the deepening of social inequality.

'근본적인 쟁점' (fundamental point of contention) signifies depth. '사회적 불평등의 심화' (deepening of social inequality) is a complex abstract concept.

2

그 보고서는 해당 정책의 잠재적 쟁점들을 상세히 분석했습니다.

That report analyzed in detail the potential points of contention of the relevant policy.

'잠재적 쟁점들' (potential points of contention) refers to issues that may arise. '상세히 분석했습니다' (analyzed in detail) shows thoroughness.

3

국제 사회는 기후 변화에 대한 각국의 입장 차이에서 발생하는 쟁점들을 해결하기 위해 노력하고 있습니다.

The international community is striving to resolve the points of contention arising from the differences in each country's stance on climate change.

This sentence uses complex sentence structure, connecting multiple concepts: '국제 사회' (international community), '기후 변화' (climate change), '각국의 입장 차이' (differences in each country's stance), and the resulting '쟁점들'. '발생하는' (arising from) connects the cause and effect.

4

이 역사적 사건을 해석하는 데에는 여러 학술적 쟁점이 존재합니다.

Several academic points of contention exist in interpreting this historical event.

'학술적 쟁점' (academic point of contention) specifies the context. '해석하는 데에는' (in interpreting) sets the scope.

5

그 토론에서 가장 첨예했던 쟁점은 바로 개인의 자유와 공공의 안전 사이의 균형이었습니다.

The most contentious point of contention in that debate was precisely the balance between individual freedom and public safety.

'첨예했던 쟁점' (most contentious point of contention) emphasizes the sharpness of the disagreement. '개인의 자유와 공공의 안전 사이의 균형' (balance between individual freedom and public safety) is a classic philosophical debate.

6

기업의 사회적 책임에 대한 논의는 여전히 많은 쟁점을 안고 있습니다.

The discussion on corporate social responsibility still carries many points of contention.

'기업의 사회적 책임' (corporate social responsibility) is a complex topic. '많은 쟁점을 안고 있습니다' (carries many points of contention) implies ongoing debate.

7

이 문제는 단순히 기술적인 쟁점을 넘어 윤리적, 철학적 차원까지 포함합니다.

This issue goes beyond mere technical points of contention to include ethical and philosophical dimensions.

'단순히 기술적인 쟁점을 넘어' (beyond mere technical points of contention) contrasts with broader implications. '윤리적, 철학적 차원' (ethical, philosophical dimensions) adds complexity.

8

그 사건의 법적 쟁점은 증거의 신뢰성에 달려 있었습니다.

The legal points of contention of that case depended on the reliability of the evidence.

'법적 쟁점' (legal point of contention) is specific. '증거의 신뢰성에 달려 있었습니다' (depended on the reliability of the evidence) shows the critical factor.

1

이론 물리학의 난해한 쟁점들은 일반 대중의 이해 범주를 훨씬 뛰어넘습니다.

The abstruse points of contention in theoretical physics far exceed the comprehension of the general public.

'난해한 쟁점들' (abstruse points of contention) implies extreme difficulty. '이해 범주를 훨씬 뛰어넘습니다' (far exceed the comprehension) highlights the advanced nature.

2

그 정치적 수사는 쟁점 자체보다는 감정적인 호소에 더 중점을 두었습니다.

That political rhetoric focused more on emotional appeal than on the actual points of contention.

'정치적 수사' (political rhetoric) is contrasted with '쟁점 자체' (the actual points of contention). '감정적인 호소' (emotional appeal) is the focus.

3

해당 문헌은 쟁점의 역사적 맥락을 깊이 있게 탐구하며, 각기 다른 해석들을 조명합니다.

The relevant literature delves deeply into the historical context of the points of contention, illuminating differing interpretations.

'쟁점의 역사적 맥락' (historical context of the points of contention) is a sophisticated analytical approach. '각기 다른 해석들을 조명합니다' (illuminating differing interpretations) shows the comparative aspect.

4

인공지능의 윤리적 쟁점은 기술 발전 속도를 따라가지 못하는 법적, 사회적 논의를 촉발했습니다.

The ethical points of contention of artificial intelligence have triggered legal and social discussions that cannot keep pace with the speed of technological advancement.

'인공지능의 윤리적 쟁점' (ethical points of contention of artificial intelligence) is a cutting-edge topic. '기술 발전 속도를 따라가지 못하는' (cannot keep pace with the speed of technological advancement) describes the gap.

5

그 논쟁의 쟁점을 명확히 구분하지 않으면, 피상적인 이해에 머물게 될 것입니다.

If the points of contention in that argument are not clearly distinguished, one will remain at a superficial level of understanding.

'쟁점을 명확히 구분하지 않으면' (if the points of contention are not clearly distinguished) emphasizes analytical skill. '피상적인 이해에 머물게 될 것입니다' (will remain at a superficial level of understanding) highlights the consequence.

6

해당 사안은 단순히 의견 충돌을 넘어, 근본적인 가치관의 쟁점을 내포하고 있습니다.

That matter goes beyond mere clashes of opinion and implies points of contention of fundamental values.

'의견 충돌을 넘어' (beyond clashes of opinion) shows a deeper level. '근본적인 가치관의 쟁점' (points of contention of fundamental values) refers to core beliefs.

7

그 정치적 담론에서 쟁점의 재정의는 전략적인 움직임으로 볼 수 있습니다.

The redefinition of points of contention in that political discourse can be seen as a strategic move.

'정치적 담론' (political discourse) is the arena. '쟁점의 재정의' (redefinition of points of contention) is a strategic maneuver.

8

이 고전 문학 작품 속 쟁점들은 현대 사회에도 여전히 유효한 질문을 던집니다.

The points of contention within this classic literary work still pose relevant questions to modern society.

'고전 문학 작품' (classic literary work) provides the context. '여전히 유효한 질문을 던집니다' (still pose relevant questions) shows timelessness.

反义词

합의점 공통점

常见搭配

주요 쟁점
핵심 쟁점
법적 쟁점
사회적 쟁점
정치적 쟁점
학술적 쟁점
쟁점을 제기하다
쟁점을 해결하다
쟁점을 논의하다
쟁점을 명확히 하다

常用短语

주요 쟁점

— The main point of contention; the most important issue being debated.

오늘 회의의 주요 쟁점은 예산입니다.

핵심 쟁점

— The core issue; the central and most critical point of disagreement.

이 법안의 핵심 쟁점은 개인 정보 보호입니다.

쟁점을 제기하다

— To raise a point of contention; to introduce an issue that causes disagreement.

그는 토론 중에 새로운 쟁점을 제기했습니다.

쟁점을 해결하다

— To resolve a point of contention; to find a solution to a disagreement.

양측은 쟁점을 해결하기 위해 노력했습니다.

쟁점을 논의하다

— To discuss points of contention; to debate the issues.

정상들은 여러 국제 쟁점을 논의했습니다.

쟁점을 명확히 하다

— To clarify the points of contention; to make the issues clear.

법정에서 변호사는 쟁점을 명확히 했습니다.

사회적 쟁점

— A social issue; a matter of public concern that involves disagreement.

불평등은 중요한 사회적 쟁점입니다.

정치적 쟁점

— A political issue; a matter of debate in politics.

이번 선거의 정치적 쟁점은 경제 성장입니다.

법적 쟁점

— A legal issue; a point of dispute in a legal case.

그 소송의 법적 쟁점은 계약 위반입니다.

첨예한 쟁점

— A sharp or acute point of contention; a highly controversial issue.

두 나라 사이에는 첨예한 쟁점이 존재합니다.

容易混淆的词

쟁점 vs 이슈 (Issue)

'이슈' is a broader term for a topic or problem. '쟁점' specifically refers to the point of disagreement within an issue. You can have an '이슈' without it being a '쟁점', but a '쟁점' is always an '이슈'.

쟁점 vs 문제 (Problem)

'문제' is a general term for a problem. '쟁점' is a problem that involves contention or disagreement between parties. All '쟁점' are '문제', but not all '문제' are '쟁점'.

쟁점 vs 논점 (Point of argument)

'논점' refers to a point of argument or a topic in a discussion. '쟁점' specifically implies conflict or disagreement about that point. A '논점' can become a '쟁점' if there is contention.

习语与表达

"쟁점화하다"

— To make something a point of contention; to turn an issue into a subject of debate or disagreement.

정치인들은 종종 사회 문제를 쟁점화하여 유권자의 지지를 얻으려 합니다.

Formal
"쟁점 삼다"

— To make something a central issue or point of contention; to focus on a particular aspect as the main disagreement.

그는 상대방의 약점을 쟁점으로 삼아 공격했습니다.

Neutral to Formal
"쟁점의 핵심"

— The core of the point of contention; the most fundamental aspect of the disagreement.

이 논쟁의 쟁점의 핵심은 신뢰 부족입니다.

Formal
"쟁점의 대상"

— The subject of contention; the matter that is being debated or disagreed upon.

그 법안은 현재 국민들 사이에서 쟁점의 대상이 되고 있습니다.

Formal
"쟁점의 소용돌이"

— A whirlwind of issues; a situation where many complex points of contention arise simultaneously.

이번 사건은 여러 쟁점의 소용돌이를 일으켰습니다.

Literary/Figurative
"쟁점의 꼬리"

— Lingering points of contention; unresolved issues that continue to cause problems.

그 계약에는 아직도 해결되지 않은 쟁점의 꼬리가 남아 있습니다.

Figurative
"쟁점의 불씨"

— The spark of contention; the initial cause or element that ignites a disagreement.

그의 한마디가 쟁점의 불씨가 되었습니다.

Figurative
"쟁점의 산"

— A mountain of issues; a large number of complex points of contention.

그 프로젝트는 쟁점의 산을 넘어야만 성공할 수 있었습니다.

Figurative
"쟁점의 바다"

— A sea of issues; a vast expanse of complex and often overwhelming points of contention.

그는 쟁점의 바다 속에서 길을 잃은 듯했습니다.

Figurative
"쟁점의 그림자"

— The shadow of contention; the underlying or hidden issues that influence a disagreement.

그 결정 뒤에는 쟁점의 그림자가 드리워져 있었습니다.

Figurative

容易混淆

쟁점 vs 이슈

Both refer to topics or problems being discussed.

'이슈' is a general term for a topic or problem, often a current concern. '쟁점' specifically highlights the point of disagreement or contention within an issue. For example, 'Climate change' is an '이슈', but the disagreement over specific policy measures to address it would be the '쟁점'.

환경 보호는 중요한 이슈입니다. (Environmental protection is an important issue.) vs. 그 정책의 쟁점은 비용 부담입니다. (The point of contention of that policy is the cost burden.)

쟁점 vs 문제

Both can refer to something that needs attention or resolution.

'문제' is a broad term for any problem or difficulty. '쟁점' is a specific type of problem where there is a conflict of opinions or interests between two or more parties. You can have a '문제' that is a factual difficulty, while a '쟁점' inherently involves differing views.

우리 팀에는 몇 가지 문제가 있습니다. (There are a few problems in our team.) vs. 팀원 간의 쟁점은 업무 분담입니다. (The point of contention among team members is work distribution.)

쟁점 vs 논점

Both relate to points within a discussion or argument.

'논점' refers to a point of argument or a key topic being discussed, often in a neutral or analytical way. '쟁점' specifically emphasizes the element of dispute or contention surrounding that point. A '논점' becomes a '쟁점' when there is significant disagreement about it.

이 논문의 논점은 명확합니다. (The point of argument of this paper is clear.) vs. 그 법안의 쟁점은 재정적 영향입니다. (The point of contention of that bill is the financial impact.)

쟁점 vs 갈등

Both relate to conflict or disagreement.

'갈등' refers to the state of conflict or discord itself. '쟁점' is the specific issue or point that *causes* the conflict. You can have '갈등' arising from a '쟁점'. '쟁점' is the subject of disagreement, while '갈등' is the resulting state of opposition.

그들의 갈등은 오래 지속되었습니다. (Their conflict lasted for a long time.) vs. 그 갈등의 쟁점은 과거의 오해였습니다. (The point of contention of that conflict was a past misunderstanding.)

쟁점 vs 이슈

Both refer to topics or problems being discussed.

'이슈' is a general term for a topic or problem, often a current concern. '쟁점' specifically highlights the point of disagreement or contention within an issue. For example, 'Climate change' is an '이슈', but the disagreement over specific policy measures to address it would be the '쟁점'.

환경 보호는 중요한 이슈입니다. (Environmental protection is an important issue.) vs. 그 정책의 쟁점은 비용 부담입니다. (The point of contention of that policy is the cost burden.)

句型

B1

Noun + 의 + 쟁점 + 은/는 + Noun + 입니다.

이 프로젝트의 쟁점은 예산입니다.

B1

Noun + 은/는 + 쟁점 + 이/가 + 되었습니다.

그들의 의견 차이가 쟁점이 되었습니다.

B2

Adjective + 쟁점 + 을/를 + 제기하다/야기하다.

그 발언은 심각한 사회적 쟁점을 야기했습니다.

B2

Noun + 에서의 + 쟁점 + 은/는 + Adjective + 합니다.

이번 협상에서의 쟁점은 매우 중요합니다.

B2

Noun + 은/는 + Noun + 의 + 쟁점 + 을/를 + 포함하다/안다.

그 보고서는 정책의 잠재적 쟁점들을 포함하고 있습니다.

C1

Noun + 의 + 근본적인/핵심적인 + 쟁점 + 은/는 + Noun + 에 + 있습니다.

이 사안의 근본적인 쟁점은 사회적 불평등의 심화에 있습니다.

C1

Noun + 은/는 + Noun + 과/와 + 의 + 쟁점 + 을/를 + 나타내다/의미하다.

이 문제는 기술 발전과 윤리적 가치관 사이의 쟁점을 나타냅니다.

C2

Noun + 은/는 + Noun + 의 + 쟁점 + 을/를 + 넘어 + Noun + 차원까지 + 포함하다.

이 문제는 단순히 기술적인 쟁점을 넘어 윤리적, 철학적 차원까지 포함합니다.

词族

名词

쟁점 (jaengjeom - point of contention)
쟁론 (jaengnon - dispute, argument)
쟁의 (jaengui - dispute, contention)

动词

쟁점화하다 (jaengjeomhwahada - to make an issue)
쟁점화되다 (jaengjeomhwadoeda - to become an issue)

相关

싸움 (ssaum - fight, quarrel)
논쟁 (nonjaeng - debate, argument)
대립 (daerip - confrontation, opposition)
갈등 (galdeung - conflict, discord)
이슈 (isyu - issue)
免费注册查看所有例句

如何使用

frequency

High in formal contexts (news, politics, law, academia), medium in general discussions about issues.

常见错误
  • Using "쟁점" for any general problem. → Using "쟁점" only when there is a clear disagreement or conflict of opinion.

    "쟁점" specifically refers to a point of contention or dispute. If you are simply talking about a problem that everyone agrees needs fixing, words like '문제' (problem) or '사안' (matter) might be more appropriate. For example, 'The problem with the car is that it won't start' (자동차의 문제는 시동이 걸리지 않는다는 것입니다) does not involve a '쟁점'. However, 'The main point of contention regarding the new policy is its cost' (그 새 정책의 쟁점은 비용 부담입니다) correctly uses '쟁점'.

  • Confusing "쟁점" with "이슈" or "문제". → Understanding that "쟁점" is a specific type of "이슈" or "문제" that involves disagreement.

    "이슈" (issue) and "문제" (problem) are broader terms. "쟁점" implies a specific point of conflict. For instance, 'Climate change' is a global '이슈'. However, the disagreement on whether to implement carbon taxes or invest in renewable energy would be the '쟁점' within that issue. Similarly, a '문제' could be a technical bug, while a '쟁점' would be the disagreement on how to fix it.

  • Using "쟁점" in very casual, lighthearted conversations. → Using "쟁점" in formal or semi-formal contexts where a significant disagreement is being discussed.

    While "쟁점" can be used informally to emphasize a strong disagreement, it often carries a more formal or serious tone. Using it for minor disagreements among friends, like choosing a movie, might sound overly dramatic. It's better suited for discussions about politics, law, significant social issues, or important project decisions.

  • Not being specific enough when using "쟁점". → Clearly stating what the point of contention is.

    Simply saying 'There are many 쟁점' is less informative than specifying them. For example, instead of '이 논의에는 여러 쟁점이 있습니다' (There are several points of contention in this discussion), it's better to say, '이 논의의 주요 쟁점은 예산 분배와 책임 소재입니다' (The main points of contention in this discussion are budget allocation and accountability). This provides clarity and focus.

  • Confusing "쟁점" with "논점". → Distinguishing between a point of argument ('논점') and a point of contention ('쟁점').

    '논점' (nonjeom) refers to a point of argument or a key topic in a discussion, which can be neutral. '쟁점' specifically implies a point of *disagreement* or *conflict*. A '논점' becomes a '쟁점' when there is contention surrounding it. For example, 'The main point of argument of the paper is X' (이 논문의 논점은 X입니다) is different from 'The point of contention in the debate was X' (그 토론의 쟁점은 X였습니다).

小贴士

Understand the Setting

The word "쟁점" is most appropriately used in formal or semi-formal contexts where there is a clear disagreement or debate. Using it in casual chat might sound overly serious. Consider the situation: Is it a legal argument, a political discussion, an academic paper, or a news report? This will help you determine if "쟁점" is the right word.

Be Precise

When using "쟁점," try to be specific about what the point of contention is. Instead of just saying 'There are many 쟁점,' try to identify them, for example, 'The main 쟁점 are budget allocation and responsibility.' This makes your communication clearer and more effective.

Know Your Synonyms

Be aware of words like '이슈' (issue), '문제' (problem), and '논점' (point of argument). While related, '쟁점' specifically implies disagreement. Using it correctly shows a nuanced understanding of Korean.

Highlight the Conflict

Remember that the core of "쟁점" is disagreement. If you're simply stating a topic or a problem without any opposing views, other words might be more suitable. "쟁점" is for the heart of a dispute.

Learn from Usage

Expose yourself to how "쟁점" is used in authentic materials like news articles, legal texts, and academic papers. Pay attention to the surrounding vocabulary and sentence structures to grasp its full meaning and application.

Signify Significance

Often, "쟁점" is used to highlight the most critical or significant points of disagreement. Phrases like '주요 쟁점' (main point of contention) or '핵심 쟁점' (core point of contention) emphasize its importance in a discussion or resolution process.

Connect with Actions

"쟁점" is frequently used with verbs that describe actions related to disagreement and resolution, such as '제기하다' (to raise), '해결하다' (to resolve), '논의하다' (to discuss), and '분석하다' (to analyze). Understanding these collocations will help you use the word more naturally.

Maintain Formality

Given its common use in formal settings, using "쟁점" can lend a more serious and analytical tone to your Korean. Be conscious of this when choosing words in different social situations.

Find the Heart of the Matter

When you encounter "쟁점," ask yourself: 'What is the specific thing that people are arguing about? What is the central question that divides opinions?' This will help you understand its meaning in context.

Expand Your Lexicon

Learning "쟁점" is a great opportunity to also learn related terms like '논쟁' (debate), '갈등' (conflict), and '이해관계' (interests), which will enrich your understanding of discussions and disagreements in Korean.

记住它

记忆技巧

Imagine a 'point' (점) on a map that two armies are 'fighting' (쟁) over. That point is the 쟁점.

视觉联想

Picture a courtroom scene where a judge is pointing to a specific legal document (the 'point') that is the subject of intense debate between lawyers (the 'contention').

Word Web

Disagreement Core Issue Debate Lawsuit Argument Contention Problem Topic of Conflict Crux

挑战

Try to identify the 쟁점 in a news article or a political debate. What is the central point of disagreement that the author or speakers are focusing on?

词源

The word "쟁점" is a Sino-Korean word, derived from Chinese characters. It is composed of two Hanja: 爭 (쟁) meaning 'to fight', 'to contend', or 'to dispute', and 點 (점) meaning 'point', 'dot', or 'item'.

原始含义： Literally, 'point of contention' or 'point of dispute'.

Sino-Korean

文化背景

When discussing sensitive topics, using '쟁점' can help to frame the disagreement objectively, focusing on the issue rather than personal attacks. However, the term itself implies a degree of conflict, so its use should be appropriate to the context and the relationship between the speakers.

In English-speaking cultures, similar concepts are expressed through words like 'point of contention,' 'issue,' 'bone of contention,' or 'crux of the matter.' The formality and specific context in which '쟁점' is used often dictate the best English equivalent.

Korean news articles discussing political debates often highlight '주요 쟁점' (main points of contention) of elections or policy changes. Legal dramas and news reports about court cases frequently refer to '법적 쟁점' (legal points of contention) that need to be decided. Academic papers will often outline the '학술적 쟁점' (academic points of contention) within a particular field of study.

在生活中练习

真实语境

Political Debates

  • 오늘의 주요 쟁점은...
  • 후보자들은 이 쟁점에 대해 어떻게 생각합니까?
  • 선거의 핵심 쟁점은 경제입니다.

Legal Proceedings

  • 사건의 법적 쟁점은...
  • 쟁점을 명확히 밝혀주십시오.
  • 증거가 쟁점을 뒷받침합니다.

Academic Discussions

  • 이 이론의 쟁점은 무엇인가?
  • 학술적 쟁점을 탐구하다.
  • 쟁점에 대한 다양한 해석.

News Reporting

  • 사회적 쟁점으로 떠오르다.
  • 쟁점을 조명하다.
  • 이슈의 쟁점.

Business Negotiations

  • 협상의 쟁점은 가격입니다.
  • 쟁점을 해결하기 위한 노력.
  • 잠재적 쟁점을 예측하다.

对话开场白

"요즘 가장 큰 사회적 쟁점은 무엇이라고 생각하세요?"

"뉴스에서 본 내용 중에 가장 흥미로운 쟁점이 있었나요?"

"만약 당신이 정치인이라면, 어떤 쟁점에 집중하겠습니까?"

"이 문제에 대해 우리가 어떤 쟁점을 가지고 있는지 이야기해 봅시다."

"당신의 전공 분야에서 가장 중요한 쟁점은 무엇인가요?"

日记主题

오늘날 우리 사회에서 가장 중요하다고 생각하는 쟁점은 무엇이며, 그 이유는 무엇입니까?

당신이 경험했던 가장 큰 의견 충돌(쟁점)은 무엇이었고, 어떻게 해결되었습니까?

만약 당신이 특정 쟁점에 대해 반대 입장을 취한다면, 당신의 주된 논거는 무엇일까요?

미래 사회에서 새롭게 부상할 것으로 예상되는 쟁점은 무엇이며, 우리는 어떻게 대비해야 할까요?

어떤 쟁점은 쉽게 해결되지만, 어떤 쟁점은 왜 그렇게 오래 지속되는 것 같나요? 그 이유를 분석해보세요.

常见问题

10 个问题

The most common contexts for using "쟁점" are formal discussions such as political debates, legal proceedings, academic arguments, and news reporting. In these situations, "쟁점" precisely identifies the central point of disagreement or the core issue that is being debated or decided.

While "쟁점" is primarily used in formal settings, it can be used in more casual conversations to highlight a significant point of disagreement, especially if the speaker wants to emphasize the seriousness of the issue. However, it might sound a bit formal or dramatic in very lighthearted discussions. More general terms like '의견 차이' (difference of opinion) might be more natural for minor disagreements.

"이슈" (issue) is a broader term for a topic or problem that is being discussed, often a current public concern. "쟁점" is more specific; it refers to the point of contention or disagreement *within* an issue. An issue can exist without being a point of contention, but a point of contention is always an issue.

A "문제" (problem) is any matter that requires attention or is difficult. A "쟁점" is a specific type of "문제" where there are differing opinions or opposing interests between parties. If people are disagreeing about it, it's likely a "쟁점"; if it's just a difficulty to be overcome, it's a "문제".

Not necessarily. While "쟁점" implies disagreement, it's often used in a neutral or analytical way to identify the core issues that need to be addressed for progress to be made, especially in legal or academic contexts. It helps to clarify what needs to be resolved.

Common adjectives include '주요' (main), '핵심' (core), '법적' (legal), '사회적' (social), '정치적' (political), '학술적' (academic), and '첨예한' (sharp/acute).

Try reading Korean news articles about current events or political debates and identify the "쟁점" being discussed. You can also practice by describing disagreements you observe or experience using the word "쟁점" in Korean sentences.

The word "쟁점" is composed of two Chinese characters: 爭 (쟁), meaning 'to fight' or 'to contend', and 點 (점), meaning 'point'. So, it literally translates to 'point of contention' or 'point of dispute'.

Yes, very common phrases include '주요 쟁점' (main point of contention), '핵심 쟁점' (core point of contention), '쟁점을 제기하다' (to raise a point of contention), '쟁점을 해결하다' (to resolve a point of contention), and '쟁점을 논의하다' (to discuss points of contention).

"논점" (nonjeom) refers to a point of argument or a key topic in a discussion, often from a neutral or analytical perspective. "쟁점" specifically emphasizes the disagreement or conflict surrounding that point. A "논점" can become a "쟁점" if there's contention.

免费注册查看提示和笔记

自我测试 10 个问题

/ 10 correct

Perfect score!

免费注册开始练习

相关内容

有帮助吗？

评论 (0)

登录后评论
还没有评论。成为第一个分享想法的人！