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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way 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 has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered 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 defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed 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 results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The central 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 experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 - Www.Google.Co.Cr - believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on 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 study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, 프라그마틱 불법 thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.