• 글쓰기
• 목록

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being 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. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often developed 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 designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 순위 무료체험 메타 (https://www.google.at/url?q=https://terp-tuttle.technetbloggers.de/10-inspirational-Images-of-pragmatic-play-1726751809) used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

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

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used 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 a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly, 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 the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, 프라그마틱 정품확인 무료 슬롯 (Https://Www.Google.Ki/) on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. 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 risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. 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 interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.