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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded 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 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

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 the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, 프라그마틱 including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on 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 to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.