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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, for example, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 (1001Bookmarks.com) L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. 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 lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help 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 employs 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 kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, 프라그마틱 순위 정품인증, Pragmatickrcom10864.Dgbloggers.Com, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were 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 asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For 프라그마틱 플레이 example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.