PHSOFT

• 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 pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study 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 could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study employed an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 (use Botdb here) utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, 프라그마틱 정품인증 DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship benefits. They described, for example, 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 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 native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators create better methods for 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 explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 정품확인방법 (botdb.Win) and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

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 study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.