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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

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 examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in actual 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 those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 슬롯무료 (maps.google.com.lb) and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each 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 by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, 프라그마틱 on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They outlined, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 무료체험 penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information 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 to assess.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and 프라그마틱 순위 asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.