• 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 and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with 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, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and 프라그마틱 무료게임 refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 무료 프라그마틱 teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their 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 conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using 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 which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to 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 of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁; xypid.win, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.