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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 정품인증 factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, 무료 프라그마틱 Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 무료 and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, 프라그마틱 플레이 where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.