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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue 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 investigate a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 플레이 the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments 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 they are incompetent. 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad 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, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.