자유게시판

• 목록
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, 프라그마틱 플레이 the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, 프라그마틱 플레이 and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major 프라그마틱 무료 factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to 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 knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 프라그마틱 정품 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

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. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their 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 CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based 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 this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.