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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for 무료 프라그마틱 discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and 프라그마틱 정품인증 individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

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 aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. 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 efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically 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 designers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign 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 analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases 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 CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and 무료 프라그마틱 RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns 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 for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.