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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 (Ckxken.Synology.me) in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 무료 슬롯 (Justpin.Date) complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This 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 this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.