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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were important. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined 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 level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had 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 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 knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 정품인증 (check over here) they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors like relational benefits. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled 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 might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.