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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for 프라그마틱 플레이 cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

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

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in 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 of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 데모 44 CNSs and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 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 their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 데모 [sites] linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid 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 strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.