• 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 relational affordances they had access to were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools 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 required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 either converging to L1 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 were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic 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, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 - https://Johsocial.com/story8403041/10-pragmatic-Slots-Free-tricks-all-Experts-recommend, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.