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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 (https://hyperbookmarks.com/story18077605/check-out-how-pragmatic-image-Is-taking-over-and-what-can-we-do-about-it) instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 데모 the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used 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 understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could 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 identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.