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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 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 a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or 프라그마틱 정품인증 assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 순위 (mouse click the following internet site) content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 무료스핀 [https://bookmarksfocus.com/story3526423/What-s-the-job-market-for-pragmatic-free-slots-professionals-like] RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand 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-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reassess their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources including documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.