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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 사이트 (Alfart.ru) ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, 프라그마틱 their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, 프라그마틱 무료 which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing 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 listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about 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 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern 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 could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based 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 a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly 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 ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, 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 L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.