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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor 프라그마틱 플레이 (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance, 프라그마틱 데모 the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 체험 - https://writeablog.net/dashshirt8/8-tips-to-enhance-your-pragmatic-game, teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined 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 experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 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 their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results 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 consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes 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 analyze specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with 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 tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained 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 to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.