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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 무료체험 메타 (Ezproxy.cityu.edu.Hk) more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and 프라그마틱 무료체험 conventionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for 프라그마틱 무료 L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, 프라그마틱 정품확인 in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general 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 specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on 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 about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.