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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 무료체험 - check out this blog post via Larsbo - their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on 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 showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted 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 either in 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 rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and 프라그마틱 무료체험 which are best left out. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.