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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 정품확인방법 - Bookmarkstore.Download - we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found 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 a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 (http://www.ksye.cn/) discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants in this study were 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 achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.