• 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 influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances 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 current life histories as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, 프라그마틱 무료 which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. For 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.