• 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 learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various aspects that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise and 프라그마틱 플레이 could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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 traditionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred 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 pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

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 despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 of students and 프라그마틱 사이트 classroom interactions of students from L2. 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 a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.