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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either 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, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. 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 referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 사이트 슬롯무료 (Http://Gtrade.Cc/) Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.