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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. For example the DCT is unable to account for 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 슬롯 the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and 프라그마틱 불법 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 체험 (https://qooh.Me/) conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 read each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. 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 CLKs, on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic 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 her belief that native Koreans would do this.