• 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, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests 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 less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and 프라그마틱 무료게임 카지노 (Https://pragmatickr-com97642.full-design.Com) their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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 this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.