• 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 as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine 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 using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

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 could be 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' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작, https://socialclubfm.com, to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. 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 research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.