• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, 프라그마틱 사이트 무료체험 슬롯버프 - relevant webpage, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research used 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 select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료게임 불법 (relevant webpage) their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs 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 native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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 though they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and 프라그마틱 정품인증 linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea 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 research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.