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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 플레이 (address here) may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯체험 (Our Web Site) lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted 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 asked to complete the DCTs and 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 conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and 프라그마틱 카지노 hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.