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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has a few drawbacks. 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. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 evaluation.

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 the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 프라그마틱 순위 슬롯 프라그마틱 추천 (maps.google.com.Br) Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior 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 employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience 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 situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The key 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 tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to 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 even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies 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 an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as 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 susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to 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 below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.