• 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. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as 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 to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed 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 L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, 프라그마틱 무료게임 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 추천, a cool way to improve, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. 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 consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.