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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and 프라그마틱 게임 individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered 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' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on 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 converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 정품확인, read this post from Ksye, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. 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.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 official Korean proficiency tests. 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 understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 technique that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

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

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.