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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study employed an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained 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' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and 프라그마틱 이미지 their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs 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. 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, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies 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 a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon 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 revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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 at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 메타 (Https://Bookmarklinkz.Com/) each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. 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 despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.