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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and 프라그마틱 슬롯 learner-internal elements, 프라그마틱 이미지 were important. For instance, 프라그마틱 게임 RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, 프라그마틱 게임 it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

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 the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised 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 in either their L1 or 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 when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful 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 case study was based upon 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 the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and 프라그마틱 플레이 asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.