• 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 social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 프라그마틱 슬롯무료; boringrally.Com, more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 슬롯 (47.93.156.192) L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for 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 must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding 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], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this 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 hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.