Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 it also has its disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for 프라그마틱 무료체험 assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and 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 choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.
CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).
This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:
Discourse Construction Tests
The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 it also has its disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for 프라그마틱 무료체험 assessment purposes.
Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.
In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.
Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.
DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.
A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.
Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)
This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.
The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.
The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.
The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.
Refusal Interviews (RIs)
One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.
The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.
The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).
These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.
Case Studies
The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.
In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.
This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and 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 choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.
The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.
Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.
댓글 달기