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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 무료 슬롯; Link Home Page, them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 순위 and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 게임 (just click meshbookmarks.com) while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 (Express-Page.com) Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.