• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 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. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major 프라그마틱 정품인증 issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for 프라그마틱 무료스핀 L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 프라그마틱 데모 - https://Ticketsbookmarks.com - 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, 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. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 정품인증 (by expressbookmark.com) the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.