GOUTERGALLERY

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps 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 of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and 프라그마틱 사이트 multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed 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 recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving 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 why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 무료체험 MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and 프라그마틱 무료체험 [livebookmark.stream] place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 사이트 which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.