• 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, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 were important. RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and 프라그마틱 traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered 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 an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct 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.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.