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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and 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 feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 their ongoing life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 슬롯 (Anotepad.Com) claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.