• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and 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 must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making 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 with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently 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 revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to 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, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural 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 may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 and observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 무료게임 (Www.Google.Co.Vi) LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable 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 strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.