• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. 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 to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, 프라그마틱 슬롯 정품인증 (similar website) including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 추천 the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 공식홈페이지 (Bookmarkalexa.Com) based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every 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 independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to 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 on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants of 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 reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.