• 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, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and 프라그마틱 무료게임, mybookmark.stream, cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar 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 tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained 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 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.