전체검색

• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 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 relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 could result in 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 useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, 프라그마틱 게임 and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding 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 intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 (Https://Arcade-Directory.Com/) not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings 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 is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 게임 example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of 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, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider 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 despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 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 investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on 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 study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.