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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 라이브 카지노 capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as 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 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. 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 found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 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 showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 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 select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency 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 L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.