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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they had access to were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 (demoderno-Parquet.ru) cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other 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 based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and 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 preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even when they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. They described, for 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 (Community.rivernetwork.Org) official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create 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 an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or 프라그마틱 사이트 unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help 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 study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.