• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 정품 (www.google.co.ls) in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist 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, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and 프라그마틱 무료 refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then 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 could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 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 required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors such as relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and 프라그마틱 체험 in specific situations. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to 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 an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

Furthermore, 프라그마틱 카지노 the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.