• 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 relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. The RIs from TS and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

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 of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and 프라그마틱 플레이 L2 norms or 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts 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 as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to 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 technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, 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 highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.