자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

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 its drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across 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 study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

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 프라그마틱 정품 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 [Werite's website] Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료게임 ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and 프라그마틱 추천 L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that 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 recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the 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 situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 (Werite's website) linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. 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 focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial 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 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.