자유게시판

• 목록
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and 프라그마틱 환수율 may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

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 use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 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 revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, 프라그마틱 슬롯 in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, 프라그마틱 무료게임 슬롯 (thetopsdirectory.com) DCTs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. 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 follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as 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 students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.