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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on 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 differences. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as politeness, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천버프 (Click At this website) turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 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 form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for 슬롯 pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform 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 aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including 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.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.