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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests, 프라그마틱 사이트 (Yourbookmark.stream) and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed 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 and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 (maps.google.Com.ua) HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For 프라그마틱 게임 instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.