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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of 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 warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 불법 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 슬롯버프 - Kiigasofthub.com - including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs 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 L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor 프라그마틱 무료체험 at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built 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 the test showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.