자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and 프라그마틱 무료 the relational affordances they had access to were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has its drawbacks. For 프라그마틱 instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for 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 in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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 less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 정품확인 Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea 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. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 프라그마틱 이미지 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, 프라그마틱 불법 the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.