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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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 (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their 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 native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For 프라그마틱 게임 슈가러쉬 - Read the Full Content, example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be 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 different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to develop 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 a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.