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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then 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 familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 프라그마틱 추천 then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 이미지 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 팁, look these up, RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. 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 deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This 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 experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.