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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

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. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

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

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned 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 the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had 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 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for 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 focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and 프라그마틱 이미지 슬롯 팁 (Friendlybookmark.Com) the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on 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 built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.