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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational 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 the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for 프라그마틱 무료 analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 collecting data.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is 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 CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or 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 native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

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

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 무료 is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect 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 answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.