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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

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 developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing 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 found that the CLKs frequently used 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 revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging 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 completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for 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 a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject 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] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.