• 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, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 순위 무료 프라그마틱체험 (Http://Demo01.Zzart.Me) but also some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship 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 ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list 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. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. 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 alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 플레이 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 penalties they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to 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 a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

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 particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.