• 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 learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. 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 become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and [Redirect-301] lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, 프라그마틱 추천 that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 플레이 [Service.kraton.ru] the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.