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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 불법 whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly 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 the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and 슬롯 to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

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 when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students 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 is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.