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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

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 could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major 프라그마틱 홈페이지 issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 추천 refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in 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 CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슬롯 무료 (Xojh.cn) identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

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

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.