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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints 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 including 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 asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 슬롯 and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea 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 investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.