• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, 프라그마틱 플레이 정품 확인법 (click through the up coming page) information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, 프라그마틱 플레이 and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 무료 프라그마틱 teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various 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 first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from 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 aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.