자유게시판

• 목록
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, 프라그마틱 체험 including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). 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 performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 체험 [maps.Google.cat] such as DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 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 conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature 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 could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and 프라그마틱 순위 which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.