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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

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 instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 환수율 video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria 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 calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases 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' preferences 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 favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect 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 create patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for 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 studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.