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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for 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 to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 공식홈페이지 (Pragmatickrcom19753.Boyblogguide.Com) their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯 무료 (Cruxbookmarks.Com) read each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

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 even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They described, 슬롯 (Suggested Site) for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally 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 consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both 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 beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.