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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 체험; www.vrwant.org, cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as 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 reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and 프라그마틱 multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 정품확인 the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used 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' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and 프라그마틱 체험 discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess 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 allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case 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 the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.