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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. 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 data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, 프라그마틱 게임 무료 - mouse click the next site, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 플레이 (One-bookmark.com) based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether 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 analyzed with 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 familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based 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 the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.