자유게시판

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

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 analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, 무료 프라그마틱 turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

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 designers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and 라이브 카지노 relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For 프라그마틱 홈페이지 instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. They described, for 프라그마틱 무료게임 example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's 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 investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and 프라그마틱 사이트 documents to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.