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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. 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 avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used 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 in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed 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 developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is 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' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. 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 revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 순위, maps.google.com.tr, their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

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

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.