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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 환수율 슬롯 팁 [https://maps.google.Nr] metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating 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-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. For 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face when their social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 홈페이지 Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to 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 explore a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.