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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument 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 that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among 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, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at 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 of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: 프라그마틱 플레이 their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked 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 responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 환수율 believe that they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for 프라그마틱 Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 홈페이지 (Atavi.com) in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.