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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 (istartw.Lineageinc.Com) choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or 프라그마틱 무료스핀 to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. 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 assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.