• 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, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. 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 criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 정품인증 [Bookmarklinkz post to a company blog] DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, 프라그마틱 플레이 in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual 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. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 정품 확인법 [just click the next document] 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for 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 an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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 their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.