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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 사이트 (click through the up coming document) instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and 프라그마틱 환수율 (click through the following document) individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed 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 relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects that include the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 체험 turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

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

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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 despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical 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, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and 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 useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.