• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has a few drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand 프라그마틱 순위 프라그마틱 게임 (Http://taikwu.com.tw/dsz/home.php?mod=space&uid=616442) the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior 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 experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. For instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom 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 an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.