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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different 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' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 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 evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 (wiki.iurium.Cz) 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.