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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different 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 study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study employed an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed 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 could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 L2 norms, 프라그마틱 게임 while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 카지노 transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 프라그마틱 정품인증 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference 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 reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.