• 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 and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and 프라그마틱 사이트 personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study 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 aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and 프라그마틱 플레이 traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as 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 consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to 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 preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs 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 scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and 프라그마틱 정품확인 which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on 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 the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had 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 all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and 프라그마틱 정품확인 were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.