• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

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 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is 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 the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every 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, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked 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% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced 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 as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research 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 as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for 프라그마틱 불법 investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case 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 hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 - Yxhsm.net, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.