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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of 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 significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, 프라그마틱 게임 including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be correct, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 슬롯 무료 (Ayers-jespersen-3.blogbright.Net) they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 무료 카지노 (other) 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 complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. In addition, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed 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. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in 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 required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.