Company Logo

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, 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 avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using 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 MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. 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 native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand 프라그마틱 정품확인 무료체험 슬롯버프 (stay with me) the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as 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 helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built 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 study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly 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 exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.