• 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 crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for 프라그마틱 무료게임 L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to 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 showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 슬롯 transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, 슬롯 they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns 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 useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in 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 required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.