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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 무료체험 the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 슬롯 based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 their relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance 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 analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and 프라그마틱 카지노 then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the 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 rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the concerns 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 useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.