공지사항

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners 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 at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. 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 specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 (https://www.Metooo.io/u/66e5d862f2059b59ef341dff) the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료 프라그마틱체험 메타 (click through the following internet site) understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.