• 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 important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for 프라그마틱 환수율 linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. 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 example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and 프라그마틱 추천 intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.