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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue 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 investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

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 euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (Francegenweb.Com) transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for 프라그마틱 환수율 Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.