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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and 프라그마틱 플레이 the social ties they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 무료 정품확인 (instapages.stream) the DCT has become one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior 프라그마틱 추천 in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring 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 answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.