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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were important. For 프라그마틱 정품 instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in 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 plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for 프라그마틱 이미지 무료 슬롯, Http://Www.Bitspower.Com/Support/User/Dishdinghy75, testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 무료 슬롯 (mouse click the up coming document) DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be 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' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options 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, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of 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 asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.