• 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 as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in 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 the social variables that are relevant to politeness 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 of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 조작 (http://bridgehome.Cn) the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.