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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or 프라그마틱 환수율 (simply click the next website) more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety 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 DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 (Bookmarkbells.Com) we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist 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 in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.