자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior 프라그마틱 정품확인 to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be 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 social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or 프라그마틱 사이트 departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

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

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. Furthermore, 프라그마틱 they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore 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 risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon 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 experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers 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 lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on 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 that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.