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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in 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. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed 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 choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, 프라그마틱 플레이 were then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 (https://pimenow.ru/bitrix/rk.Php?goto=https://pragmatickr.com) beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

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 which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.