• 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 and learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their local professor 프라그마틱 사이트 [Bridgehome.cn] relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study 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 feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 불법 the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to 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 strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources 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 using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, 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 were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved 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 required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.