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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and 슬롯 (Https://apollobookmarks.com/story18040185/The-Little-known-benefits-of-pragmatic-return-Rate) the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s 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 pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed 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 showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 사이트 RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and 프라그마틱 플레이 정품확인 (https://greatbookmarking.com) discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong 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 reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.