• 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. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed 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 accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and 프라그마틱 불법 (bookmarkstore.download) MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험무료; Maps.google.com.ar blog article, its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.