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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 (minibookmarks.Com) relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 게임 the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

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

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the 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 the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, 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 to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and 프라그마틱 정품 that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often 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 showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and 프라그마틱 체험 then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.