• 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 and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relational affordances. 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 were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern 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 perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and 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 method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or 프라그마틱 순위 체험 (click to read) complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.