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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 (pragmatic97531.bloginwi.com) including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of 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 an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect 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 do so.