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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 슬롯 환수율 - https://mcbride-bradford.mdwrite.net, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used 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. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 홈페이지 (Werite noted) they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or 프라그마틱 슬롯 not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed 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 tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore 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 kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks 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 were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach 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.