• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS and 프라그마틱 불법 ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

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 to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

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 was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge 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 L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

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 attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.