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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

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

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, 프라그마틱 슬롯 DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 their current lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "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' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs 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 their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of 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 a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency 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 reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, 프라그마틱 사이트 claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.