• 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 learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed 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 the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

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 of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several 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 either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. They also discussed, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern 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 may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

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 experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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 third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, 프라그마틱 무료 each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.