• 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 the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic 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. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of 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 perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor 프라그마틱 무료스핀 (Minecraftcommand.Science) to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, 프라그마틱 환수율 and observations, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help you determine 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 broad understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or 프라그마틱 홈페이지 third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.