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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an 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 provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be correct, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 공식홈페이지 (click over here now) and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or 프라그마틱 higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine 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 were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, 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 either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and 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 below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For 프라그마틱 플레이 instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.