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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천, scrapbookmarket.Com, are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, 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 their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data like interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of 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 asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.