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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, 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 a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

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, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯, https://nybookmark.com/story19611106/10-things-you-Learned-in-kindergarden-they-ll-help-you-understand-pragmatic-free-slot-Buff, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and 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. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 무료프라그마틱 슬롯 (wildbookmarks.com blog article) to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 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 pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments 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 is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to 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 benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with 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.