• 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 relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, 프라그마틱 정품인증 정품 [Https://Sparxsocial.Com] and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 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 their L2. 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 on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "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-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate 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 L2 Korean students who had attained the level of 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 asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.