• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating 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 for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not always precise and could 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 research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to 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, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question with 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 complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns 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 choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's 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 strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the goals 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 beneficial to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to 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 an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천; Thebookmarkking.com, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 이미지 (bookmarkalexa.com) example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.