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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully 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 슬롯무료 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프슬롯 (www.Viewtool.com) information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, 프라그마틱 데모 like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing 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 encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. Coding 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 were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? 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. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.