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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 (http://www.028bbs.com) challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 (the full details) converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, 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 choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.