• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and 프라그마틱 정품확인 ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most 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 warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with 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 choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native 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 scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. 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 an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study 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 the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for 프라그마틱 무료게임 정품; https://Beastparrot20.bravejournal.net/comprehensive-list-of-Pragmatic-Experience-dos-and-donts, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.