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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 게임 like the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 플레이 the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 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 resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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 year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.