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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it 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 to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. 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 must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and 프라그마틱 불법 (cheapbookmarking.com) form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which 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 has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and 프라그마틱 무료게임 their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that 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 a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs 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 in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. 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 preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like documents, interviews, 프라그마틱 정품 and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

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

The participants in this study were all 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, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.