• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or 프라그마틱 순위 정품확인 (this site) evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding 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 at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 순위 슬롯 프라그마틱 무료 - visit my website, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. For 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might 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 ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.