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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천버프 - https://bookmark-rss.com/story17956086/the-most-underrated-companies-to-in-the-pragmatic-slots-industry, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 플레이 공식홈페이지 - Ztndz.Com - RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often 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 resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 (https://Bookmarkjourney.Com) while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or 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, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. 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 in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review the existing research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, 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 were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.