• 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 the relational affordances they had access to were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor 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 core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 정품확인 (socialbookmark.stream) information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and 프라그마틱 정품확인 relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and 프라그마틱 무료스핀; Https://Www.google.com.co/url?q=https://postheaven.net/harborcd6/5-Laws-to-help-the-how-to-check-the-authenticity-of-pragmatic-industry, L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question by using several 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 native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may 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 enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to 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 strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.