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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication 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 complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized 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 appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and 프라그마틱 카지노 based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized 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 were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed 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 the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. They also discussed, for 무료 프라그마틱 instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures 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 the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, 프라그마틱 환수율 체험, Imoodle.Win, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes numerous sources of information like documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called 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 L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. 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.