• 글쓰기
• 목록

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 게임 순위; try here, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 프라그마틱 순위 (this website) the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and 프라그마틱 플레이 beyond. 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 in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.