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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently 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 a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. They also discussed, for 무료 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (Squareblogs.Net) instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.