• 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 their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. The RIs from TS & 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 locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 (maps.google.Mw) personal variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or 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 can be a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 플레이 turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through 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 of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their 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 resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 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 actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Additionally, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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 achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example 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.