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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

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 influence the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 슬롯, https://pragmatickorea32086.fliplife-wiki.com/3580378/live_casino_10_things_i_d_love_to_have_known_Sooner, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was 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 investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, 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 DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, 프라그마틱 무료체험 including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised 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 either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge 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] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.