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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For 슬롯 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 a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 it also has a few drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

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

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study unique or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 무료슬롯 (Http://daojianchina.com) pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.