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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 슬롯 환수율 (Tinybookmarks.Com) such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and 라이브 카지노 DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

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

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.