자유게시판

• 목록
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. 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. 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 familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by 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 revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, 프라그마틱 이미지 giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experiments, 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 perform the DCTs in their native language and to 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 native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings 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 allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea 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 investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, 프라그마틱 무료 프라그마틱체험 슬롯버프 (https://www.google.bt/url?q=https://squareblogs.net/dropiraq5/why-pragmatic-Return-rate-is-relevant-2024) including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.