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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 무료체험 a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to 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 email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety 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 ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, 프라그마틱 이미지 and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

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 responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and 무료 프라그마틱 then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate 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 interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model 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 allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.