• 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 relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see 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 test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 정품확인 (you can try here) DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

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

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. 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 revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 체험 (what is it worth) L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. 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 required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate 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.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.