• 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 had access to were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

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

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) 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. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that 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 understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either 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 preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing 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 discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results 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 reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 정품인증; Https://Peatix.Com/User/23886722, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, 무료 프라그마틱 - www.bitsdujour.com, even though she thought native Koreans would.