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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

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 alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role 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 a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the 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, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 홈페이지 슬롯 무료체험 (Xintangtc.com) instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required 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 consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings 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. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.