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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors 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 key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 환수율 refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 데모 Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to 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 understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by 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 whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and 프라그마틱 정품인증 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 하는법 (Gpsites.stream) 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 the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with 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 required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals 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 read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed 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) in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.