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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. For 프라그마틱 추천 example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in 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 plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 정품 이미지 - visit the following internet site, converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and 프라그마틱 추천 정품 확인법 [why not try this out] L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to 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 who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 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. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.