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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For 프라그마틱 무료체험 instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the 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' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), 프라그마틱 환수율 metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 정품 and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 such as relational advantages. 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 expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, 프라그마틱 환수율 each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.