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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, 프라그마틱 추천 turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete 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 required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (Https://Redhotbookmarks.Com) did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from 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.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, 프라그마틱 추천 even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.