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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 프라그마틱 사이트 ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for 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 to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and 프라그마틱 환수율 form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 and 무료 프라그마틱 their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 환수율 transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed 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 for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.