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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study 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 can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 사이트 lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, 프라그마틱 무료게임 multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical 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 choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating 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 L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of 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 variety of research tools, 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 native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could 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 personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea 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 relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.