• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully 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 to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 슬롯버프, visit the following webpage, more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal 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 can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 (official meshbookmarks.com blog) and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop 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 technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in 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 questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and was hesitant 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.