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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and 프라그마틱 사이트 traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and 라이브 카지노 (Full Document) Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, 프라그마틱 이미지 which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 카지노 슬롯프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 - Https://Atozbookmark.Com, think they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider 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 experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Additionally, the participants in this 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 aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.