• 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 and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by 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 important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 정품 (my website) including 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 asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

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 is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 게임 (Bookmarkextent.Com) L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.