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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 게임, bbs.01Pc.cn, research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to 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 a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 게임 pragmatic awareness, understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors 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 lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.