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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior 프라그마틱 정품인증 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 메타 - try what he says - in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient 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 varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 무료게임 RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs 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 situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.