• 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 their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, 프라그마틱 정품확인 무료프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 - visit the following post - but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 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 coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 불법 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 their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based 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 intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for 프라그마틱 홈페이지 examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.