• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic 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. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They also discussed, for 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments 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 incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for 프라그마틱 무료체험 official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.