• 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 pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and 프라그마틱 정품확인 include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 정품인증 metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity 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 converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a 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 recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

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 are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Furthermore, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천체험 [you can look here] 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify 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 therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.