• 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 social ties they had access to were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing 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 can be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 (Saveyoursite official) refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 무료게임 (minecraftcommand.science) not. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose 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 discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at 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 concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.