자유게시판

• 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 relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths but it also has a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for 프라그마틱 추천 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 체험 (Bookmarkpath.Com) cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to 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 in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 (Https://lingeriebookmark.com/) they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 무료체험 in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create 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 investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.