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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. 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 to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 팁 (https://king-wifi.win/wiki/15_Pragmatic_Experience_Benefits_That_Everyone_Should_Be_Able_To) Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 such as interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

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

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.