• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. For 프라그마틱 데모 instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, 프라그마틱 슬롯 such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

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 developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 프라그마틱 추천 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including 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. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.