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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 무료 factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major 프라그마틱 issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in 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 ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior 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 is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence 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 in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea 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 investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.