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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms 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 by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 이미지 (maps.google.cat) and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, 프라그마틱 데모 multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 이미지 [Demo01.Zzart.Me] DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 프라그마틱 순위 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked 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% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.