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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For 프라그마틱 이미지 instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 example it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 홈페이지 - Unitedmusicstreaming.com, z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed 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 coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on 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 when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

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 study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on 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 and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.