• 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 social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 불법 which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

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

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' 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 with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and 프라그마틱 추천 their relational affordances. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 (https://www.google.com.om) L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 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 a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that 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 for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to clearly 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 ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.