GOUTERGALLERY

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or 프라그마틱 카지노 L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in conducting a 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 could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and 프라그마틱 정품확인 환수율 - Highly recommended Resource site, asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.