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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 무료 프라그마틱 teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) 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 are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and 프라그마틱 추천 read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and 라이브 카지노 intercultural norms of their university.

However, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data like interviews, observations, and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

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 use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.