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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could 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 useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major 프라그마틱 게임 issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, 프라그마틱 무료게임 turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 순위 슬롯 사이트 (Dokuwiki.Stream) include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or 프라그마틱 게임 to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.