• 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, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from 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 making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and 프라그마틱 체험 무료프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료버프, view Friendspo, discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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 disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.