자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and 프라그마틱 슬롯 cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for 프라그마틱 이미지 analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 사이트 a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as 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 DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted 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.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.