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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 슬롯 factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, 프라그마틱 불법 like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given 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 was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and 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, 프라그마틱 이미지 did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators 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 out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, 슬롯 and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and 슬롯 (https://Pragmatickr53197.theobloggers.com/35897241/7-small-changes-you-can-make-that-ll-make-a-big-difference-with-your-Free-pragmatic) the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and 프라그마틱 추천 which are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate 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.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.