• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of 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

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research used a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and 프라그마틱 무료체험 content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing 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. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 무료체험 is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case 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 experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (maps.Google.com.Tr) which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping 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.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.