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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in 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 to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each 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 transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 불법 and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 게임 did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.