• 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 relationship advantages they had access to were important. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, 프라그마틱 순위 but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety 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, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 - janeu248brs7.nytechwiki.com - 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and 프라그마틱 정품확인 in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators improve their methods of 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 an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.