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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or 프라그마틱 환수율 questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to 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 resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.