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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and 프라그마틱 무료 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and 프라그마틱 플레이 DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 (http://www.optionshare.tw/) recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

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 are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader 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 showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.