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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 프라그마틱 이미지 ability to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 플레이 converging to L1 or 프라그마틱 게임 departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects 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 allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.