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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of 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 to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and 프라그마틱 순위 video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms 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 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 and then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. 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. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example 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 thought native Koreans would.