• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 데모 utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using 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 proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major 프라그마틱 홈페이지 factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 Z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and 프라그마틱 discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.