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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

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 alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed 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, their ongoing life experiences and their relationship 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, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then 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 of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 데모 (Freebookmarkpost.Com) to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, 프라그마틱 multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based 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 method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex 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 matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.