• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 슬롯 as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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 resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred 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 their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

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. Furthermore, 프라그마틱 무료게임 카지노 (https://Alphabookmarking.com) they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational affordances. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of 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 utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject 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 knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to 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 distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily 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 aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.