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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 체험 정품인증 (more about Bookmarkforest) RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, 프라그마틱 정품확인 in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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 when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to 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 a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on 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 revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants in 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 university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.