PHSOFT

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

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

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, 프라그마틱 사이트 the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using 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 consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe 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 no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's 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 investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 체험 (opensocialfactory.Com) HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the 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.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.