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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. 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 expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for 프라그마틱 cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 may lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options 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. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational 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 classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior 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 phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 데모 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their 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 conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test korea 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 research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of 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 of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, 슬롯 (Bookmarkingalpha.Com) pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.