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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. 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 emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 (find out here) which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess 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 allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 (Https://Agerskov-Cahill-2.Technetbloggers.De) understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.