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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and 프라그마틱 정품확인 personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 추천 we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either 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 L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-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)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex topics that are difficult for 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 프라그마틱 정품확인 (kkkw.hatenablog.jp) its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.