• 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 and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 무료스핀 - Gpsites.Win, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe 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-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures 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 consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based 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 study showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슬롯 무료, http://idea.informer.Com/, 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.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.