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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either 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 scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and 무료 프라그마틱 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (Bbs.01Bim.com) testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called 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 pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, 프라그마틱 게임 even though she believed native Koreans would.