• 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 and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers understand 프라그마틱 플레이 the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major 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 investigate various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for 프라그마틱 정품확인 data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including 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 think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and 라이브 카지노 discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are 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 remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.