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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experiments, 프라그마틱 데모 including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 사이트 플레이 (sixn.net) and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete 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, 무료 프라그마틱 (just click the next web page) on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

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 at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant 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.