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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, 프라그마틱 무료체험 like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of 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 investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 데모 [click the up coming webpage] including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and 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 preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close 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 do so.