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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those 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 email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 사이트 (pham-Ratliff-2.hubstack.Net) MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either 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, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of 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 studies 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 research can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.