• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and 프라그마틱 슬롯 정품 사이트 (Highly recommended Site) content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: 프라그마틱 추천 정품 확인법 - Continued, why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.