• 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 their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major 프라그마틱 issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, 프라그마틱 환수율 and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' 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 level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 정품 their current life histories and their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 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 the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 프라그마틱 체험 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with 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 determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted 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 students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this 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 aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.