• 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 and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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 on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 환수율 무료게임 (https://xaitub.Com/@pragmaticplay9379?page=about) think they are incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in 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 utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and 프라그마틱 무료게임 understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary 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 choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.