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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. 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 calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including 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 consider their evaluations and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for 프라그마틱 사이트 teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex subjects 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 determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated 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 to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.