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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major 라이브 카지노 [hardin-raynor.Thoughtlanes.net] issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 데모 video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading 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 towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, 프라그마틱 정품인증 사이트 [Morphomics.Science] they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, 프라그마틱 환수율 personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. 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 default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.