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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, 프라그마틱 추천 (Yanyiku.Cn) their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for 프라그마틱 teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.