• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic 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 the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or 프라그마틱 순위 to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, 슬롯 they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view 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 aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained 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 questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.