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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid 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 has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 무료 게임 (https://Vanw142paz2.blog5star.Com) further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "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' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against 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 some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 슬롯 did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose 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 useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, 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 choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.