• 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 their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

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 with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and 라이브 카지노 L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas 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 on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants consisted 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 a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop 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 an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.