전체검색

• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL, 프라그마틱 플레이 for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 체험 (https://salovafish.ru/bitrix/redirect.php?Event1=click_to_call&event2=&event3=&goto=Https://pragmatickr.com) multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored 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 on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experiments, 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 first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, 프라그마틱 플레이 on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 플레이 and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. 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 despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.