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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs of 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 local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among 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 the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and 프라그마틱 무료체험 their decisions were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and 프라그마틱 순위 social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. 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 norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for 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 an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 further detracting from their quality of response.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.