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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, 슬롯 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 opinions and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 카지노 we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to 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 investigate a specific topic. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

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 test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.