• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 research or evaluation.

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 of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers understand 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 is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 데모; similar internet site, z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding 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 well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

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

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved 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 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.