• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. 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, 프라그마틱 플레이 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 슬롯버프 (please click the next document) did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. 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 the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information including documents, 프라그마틱 정품확인 interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding 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] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.