• 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 and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools for 프라그마틱 순위 analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, 프라그마틱 환수율 무료; Https://bookmarksfocus.com/story3526753/the-top-reasons-people-succeed-at-the-pragmatic-free-industry, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 정품인증; ledbookmark.com, refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and 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 was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings 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 is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.