• 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 crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, 프라그마틱 게임 DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent 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 of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. 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 patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and 프라그마틱 무료 linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 이미지 홈페이지; Selfless.Wiki, 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. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and 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 tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in 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 to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.