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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

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 use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 카지노 (cameradb.review) including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 무료프라그마틱 체험 슬롯버프 - Https://Articlescad.Com/ - for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. 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 within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved 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 questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. 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, even though she believed native Koreans would.