• 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 learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined 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 at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 프라그마틱 무료 (madesocials.com officially announced) multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs 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 to complete the MQs either in 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 follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, 무료 프라그마틱 사이트 (Click Link) the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed 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 still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior 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, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.