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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (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 (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT, for 무료 프라그마틱 example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of 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. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 이미지 - see post - the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked 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 interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.