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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 슬롯 환수율 (https://cruxbookmarks.com/story18115668/why-you-should-focus-on-improving-pragmatic-slots-experience) them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, 프라그마틱 무료게임 공식홈페이지 (Bookmarkahref.Com) cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. 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 linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. 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 to assess refusal competence.

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 requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several 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 MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in 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 asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.