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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor 프라그마틱 무료게임 in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, 프라그마틱 무료게임 for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁버프, Hikvisiondb.Webcam, challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated 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). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for 프라그마틱 무료게임 choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This is similar to the one 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 as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean 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 study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.