봉구티비

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

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 were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand 프라그마틱 홈페이지 the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 추천 further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). 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 performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 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 examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and 무료 프라그마틱 recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.