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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, 프라그마틱 사이트 프라그마틱 카지노 (research by the staff of Gm 6699) like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or diverging 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 whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs 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 asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, 슬롯 such as relationships and benefits. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped 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 and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify 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 determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case 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 extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 for their next test. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.