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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 instance the RIs from TS and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing 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 ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety 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 such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 불법 (Bookmarkstore.download) their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 정품인증 leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process 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 whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's 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 investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.