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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and 프라그마틱 무료체험 ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize 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 pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for 프라그마틱 무료스핀 instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.