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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were important. RIs from TS and ZL for 슬롯 instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. 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 favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. 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 on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, 프라그마틱 무료게임 the interviewees also expressed concerns 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 may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

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 ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject 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] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.