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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 [pop over to this site] cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 추천 further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those 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 examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience 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 dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 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 CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

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 study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.