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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has its drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may result in 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 is 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 alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 정품확인 lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included 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 was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were 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, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This 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 this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 슬롯 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 - pragmatickr45666.blog-Ezine.Com, she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.