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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual differences. 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 assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 정품 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and 프라그마틱 체험 the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for 라이브 카지노 pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each 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 coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results 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. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 게임 (url) of learners in the classroom and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon 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 the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.