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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and just click the up coming site the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 게임 카지노 (www.vfghomes.com official) z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료슬롯 (www.b.parks.com) principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.