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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. For example the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's 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 instance, in Situations 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 무료 환수율 (bookmarkfeeds.stream) the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed 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 compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 L2 levels. 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 patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and 프라그마틱 추천 intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 Ishihara (2009).

These results 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 revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using 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 determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

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

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

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.