• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the 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 most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 체험 슈가러쉬 (https://www.ddhszz.com) and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs 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. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect 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 at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, 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 extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in 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 university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.