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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or 프라그마틱 추천 플레이 - Http://40.118.145.212/ - assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, 무료 프라그마틱 the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or 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 despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For 프라그마틱 무료스핀 instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on 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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.