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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision 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 practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why 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 instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for 프라그마틱 데모 refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 - hikvisiondb.Webcam, teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 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 CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in 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, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

Additionally, the participants in 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 at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.