• 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 as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully 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. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating 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 to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was 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 showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 정품 (cruxbookmarks.com) converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range 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 asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and 프라그마틱 순위 social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for 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 an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding 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 an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.