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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and may lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always precise and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 사이트 - simply click the following article - could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 정품인증 (please click the next website page) while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. 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 concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

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 what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a larger 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 test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered 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 hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.