• 목록
• 답변
• 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 social ties they had access to were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs 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. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. For 프라그마틱 사이트 무료 슬롯버프; pukkabookmarks.Com, example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based 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 strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, 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 were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 체험 (source web page) their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.