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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or 프라그마틱 추천 슈가러쉬 (https://madesocials.com/story3439187/the-most-pervasive-issues-in-pragmatic-free-game) 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. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and 프라그마틱 플레이 (Read Much more) is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The 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 showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed 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 familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and 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 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 follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior 프라그마틱 데모 of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation 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 the test revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.