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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 순위 however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. 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 further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, 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 to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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 when they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 consequences that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "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 aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for 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 a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a 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 responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.