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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated 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 at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely 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' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and 프라그마틱 무료 beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 슬롯 하는법 (Valetinowiki.Racing) thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 even though she thought native Koreans would.