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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable 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 strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and 프라그마틱 순위 무료스핀, Twizax.Org, DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending 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 further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of 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 to complete the MQs in either their L1 or 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 정품인증 (firsturl.de) their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners 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 method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

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 university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.