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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 플레이 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트; Https://ok-social.com/Story3447973/are-pragmatic-return-rate-the-same-as-everyone-Says, lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring 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 showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range 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 MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging 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 transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 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 L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. For 프라그마틱 게임 (https://infopagex.com) example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and 프라그마틱 체험 was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.