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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and can 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 can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, 슬롯 and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires 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 DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs 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 required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 such as interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.