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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for 프라그마틱 무료체험 (Https://hikvisiondb.webcam/) them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 무료체험 메타, click to read, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 무료 슬롯 (https://Www.Metooo.es/) then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined 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 traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The results 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 could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs, MQs, 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 complete the MQs in either 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, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea 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 research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were 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 to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and 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.