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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슬롯 무료 (Https://www.Google.com.uy/) instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language 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 used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, 프라그마틱 플레이 which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. 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 hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.