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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages however, it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for 프라그마틱 게임 investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at 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 of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses 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 for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 - Http://Visagatedev.Sherpalize.Com/Pragmaticplay0537/Lisa1989/Issues/1, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to 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 CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful 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 allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. Additionally this will allow educators to 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 a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like documents, interviews, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 and observations to prove its findings. This kind 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 clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.