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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and 라이브 카지노 individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and 프라그마틱 사이트 슬롯 환수율 (Https://hikvisiondb.webcam) content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They aren't always precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (Https://Olderworkers.Com.Au/Author/Zatdl592Iqk-Marymarshall-Co-Uk/) in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach 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.