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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, 프라그마틱 게임 and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 정품 (Gettydirectory published an article) include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, 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 in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on 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 this even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants of 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 at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.