• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower 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 tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, 프라그마틱 이미지 multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 정품인증 L2 norms or 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key 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 by using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that closely resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.