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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is 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 use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 게임 (special info) asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after 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 discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, 프라그마틱 무료게임 라이브 카지노 (hikvisiondb.Webcam) they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.