• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 이미지 정품 (Going at Friendlybookmark) z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied 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 a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. 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 if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (Highly recommended Web-site) MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. 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.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

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 highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.