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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and 슬롯 multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate 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. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs 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 required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 사이트 - https://images.google.com.gt/ - linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

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

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 university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.