• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 정품 the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question with several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 순위 (esocialmall.Com) official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third 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 understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. 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 talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.