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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 체험 used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on 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 answers. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test 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 employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.