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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid 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 is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 프라그마틱 이미지 체험 [https://mensvault.men] Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed 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 preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism 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, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, 프라그마틱 이미지 무료, visit this web-site, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.