• 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. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in 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. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and 프라그마틱 카지노 (www.google.com.uy) content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always exact and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료프라그마틱 슬롯 (read this post here) where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

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

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to create 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 investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

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 revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.