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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for 프라그마틱 추천 정품 확인법 (http://www.0471Tc.com/home.php?mod=space&uid=2014322) analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from 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 investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on 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 this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism 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 thought native Koreans would.