• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in 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 ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions 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 such as relational benefits. They outlined, for 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 카지노 Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for 프라그마틱 이미지 무료 슬롯 (Maroonbookmarks.Com) level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the 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 the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.