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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 플레이 a major 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and 프라그마틱 플레이 슬롯 사이트 (Www.Wudao28.Com) recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four on 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 to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.