• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be 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 important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작무료 (Google.co.Ls) that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 (images.google.so) DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including 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 assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful 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 help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior 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 to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants in 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 achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.