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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 슬롯 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯; Potter-Cheek-2.Hubstack.Net, the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and 프라그마틱 추천 슬롯체험 (Glamorouslengths.Com) lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. 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. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge 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 favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 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 either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop 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 in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related 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 specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition 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 were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.