• 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 and learner-internal elements, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For 프라그마틱 홈페이지 instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 슬롯 체험 - https://Community.umidigi.com/ - L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about 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 this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. They outlined, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea 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 a method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.