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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. 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 employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and 슬롯 their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and 슬롯 discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse 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 included 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in 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 scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as 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 social norms at 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 concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one 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 for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on 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 the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.