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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why 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 tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was 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 examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms 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 for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored 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-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 프라그마틱 정품 (Pragmatickr80009.Thekatyblog.Com) observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives 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 useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

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 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 순위 (click through the next page) 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 tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.