• 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 instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

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 numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for 프라그마틱 플레이 Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods 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 research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in 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 year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and 무료 프라그마틱 추천 (due-riber.Thoughtlanes.Net) pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.