• 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 as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 순위 (Www.Kooss.Com) that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring 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 the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 슬롯 teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "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' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 순위 [www.frantver.ru] read each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs 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 complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted 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. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them 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 could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to 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 studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.