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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or 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 upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as 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 to think about their evaluations and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, 프라그마틱 플레이 the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

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 even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based 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 technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data like interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called 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 extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.