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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

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

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and 프라그마틱 데모 their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 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 revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on 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 answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. 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 default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and 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 a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built 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 the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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 of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and 프라그마틱 정품 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 메타 (read this post from 79bo2.com) asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.