GOUTERGALLERY

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for 프라그마틱 무료 them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and 프라그마틱 이미지 then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools, 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 either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.