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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 무료체험 슬롯버프 (gitlab.Vuhdo.io) but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 프라그마틱 불법 이미지, Bookmarkfeeds.Stream, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experiments, 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 either in 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 scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students 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 a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject 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 research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.