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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 추천 (esocialmall.com) it also has some drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects, including politeness, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 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 further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

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

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations, and 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 define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.