• 목록
• 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. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for 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 social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, 프라그마틱 플레이 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 추천 - online, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 추천 카지노 (just click the up coming site) transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important 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 by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 (fatallisto.com) MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.