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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 슬롯 pedagogy for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 불법 (source web page) which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. 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, such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, 슬롯 and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.