• 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 프라그마틱 정품인증 슬롯무료 (Tagoverflow.stream) the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

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 a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

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

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 무료 (visit the up coming website) 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 consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found 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 understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating 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 favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of 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 transcribed by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved 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 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.