• 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 relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슬롯 (mouse click the next page) individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that 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 compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for 프라그마틱 슬롯 converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 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 risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind 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 the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.