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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 체험 more steps could be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key 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 examine various aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and 프라그마틱 플레이 include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and 프라그마틱 사이트 the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not always exact and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case 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 for level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.