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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 정품인증 information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid 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 is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 카지노 lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험버프 (images.Google.Td) DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs 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 required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain 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 different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 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 multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

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 which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be 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 study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered 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) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the 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 were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.