자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 무료 but also a few disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to 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 is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand 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 investigate various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 환수율 체험; bookmarkingalpha.Com, teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic 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 by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 (https://directmysocial.com/Story2643978/why-Pragmatic-free-trial-meta-is-still-relevant-in-2024) 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.