• 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 their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 슬롯버프 (Socialbookmarknew.win) information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and 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 typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, 슬롯 (mouse click the up coming document) which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about 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 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for 프라그마틱 정품 teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.