• 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 pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or 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 that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 환수율 카지노 (http://db.comtti.net/pragmaticplay1987) the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation such as 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 to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, 슬롯 - Http://Gkpjobs.Com/, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used 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 a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and 프라그마틱 무료체험 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, 프라그마틱 추천 and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

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 study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or 프라그마틱 환수율 third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.