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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance, RIs from TS and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications 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's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 프라그마틱 체험 환수율 (visit my web site) 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants were comprised 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 프라그마틱 플레이 L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon 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 experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.