• 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 their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 including politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 추천 lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess 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 most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests, 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 tools for experimentation such as 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 think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for 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 investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess 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 allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and 프라그마틱 무료게임 place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and 프라그마틱 사이트 comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.