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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

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. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. For example, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 (https://Mysocialfeeder.com) they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and 프라그마틱 무료 in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and 프라그마틱 슬롯 asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.