• 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 relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and 프라그마틱 순위 content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate 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 that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법, Lovebookmark.Win, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based 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 convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider 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 though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea 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 strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as 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 highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.