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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 플레이 result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

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 influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, 프라그마틱 플레이 like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 플레이 example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 transcribed, 프라그마틱 무료체험 then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

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 attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted 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 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. They described, for example, 프라그마틱 사이트 how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 데모 penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in 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 risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind 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 the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.