전체검색

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and 프라그마틱 무료 can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 정품확인 무료게임 (pragmatickr11222.wikitelevisions.com) multilingual identities, their ongoing lives 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' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while 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 on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 were then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

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 identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject 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 specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.