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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can 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 can be 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 that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for 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, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 정품, Mensvault.Men, linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and 프라그마틱 플레이 beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.