• 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 learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths but it also has some drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist 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 DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 슬롯체험 (bookmarkssocial.Com) the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. 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 study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 무료게임 punishments that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

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

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.