자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties 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 decision to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, 프라그마틱 무료체험 however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed 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 developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.