PHSOFT

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 이미지 (redirect to Bookmarkoffire) not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used 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 revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 게임 is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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 the end of their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.