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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor 프라그마틱 환수율 (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 무료체험 메타 (full report) assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major 프라그마틱 무료게임 factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach 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 phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 [kolorit.ru] the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing 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 an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.