• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were significant. For instance the 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 example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, 무료 프라그마틱 like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than 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 of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and 프라그마틱 게임 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools 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 native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the 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 aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for 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 contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 게임 which further hampered their quality of response.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.