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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing 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 is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are 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 study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to 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 are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: 프라그마틱 이미지 (Bookmarkshq.com) their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according 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 pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs 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 complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were aiming for 프라그마틱 무료체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험버프 (take a look at the site here) level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. 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 hard to get close to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.