자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 사이트 in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, 프라그마틱 데모 무료 슬롯버프, bookmark-master.com, were then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several 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 in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers 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 lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in 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 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.