• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 슬롯 체험 - you could try these out, non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 플레이 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 examine various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This is 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 testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 (bookmarkchamp.com) deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.