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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing 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 pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 플레이 the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 플레이 including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and 프라그마틱 플레이 their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "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 revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with several experiments, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 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 perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

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. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may 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 different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover 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 a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as 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 highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and 프라그마틱 정품확인 pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, 프라그마틱 홈페이지 환수율, Www.Google.Com.Pk, even though she thought native Koreans would.