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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various 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. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using 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 could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 데모 정품 확인법 [Bookmarksden.com] DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

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 various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful 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 case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.