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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. 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 before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 the form. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in 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 upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 게임, check, and RIs. The participants comprised 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. 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 CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.