• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as 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 can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 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 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 understanding knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.