• 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 learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent 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 including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and 프라그마틱 무료게임 RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism 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, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and 프라그마틱 추천 read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in 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 scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.