• 글쓰기
• 목록

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 데모 more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always accurate, 프라그마틱 환수율 and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.