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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 무료체험 메타 (click here!) video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for 프라그마틱 데모 choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on 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 a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed 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 results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and 프라그마틱 데모 identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns 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 for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called 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 highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.