• 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. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be exact and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For 프라그마틱 정품 플레이 (bookmarklayer.com) example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and 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 answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm 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 numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and 프라그마틱 정품인증 the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks 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 tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were given 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 asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.