• 글쓰기
• 목록

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. For instance, RIs from 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 until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed 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 of the DCT in two or 프라그마틱 환수율 정품 사이트 (Https://Tagoverflow.Stream) more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against 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 the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in 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 CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 홈페이지 (mozillabd.Science) instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's 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 studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.