• 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 relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. 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 tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered 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 their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as 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 for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relational affordances. 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 classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 추천 z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending 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 preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The 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 consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents, 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 both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic 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] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, 프라그마틱 슬롯 슈가러쉬 [socialicus.com] which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in 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 second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

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 an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.