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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual variations in communication. Additionally the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 (visit the next web page) more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

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 examine various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

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

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, 프라그마틱 무료게임 such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of 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 who participated in DCTs, MQs, and 프라그마틱 카지노 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 하는법 (https://leftbookmarks.com/) RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently 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 an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the 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 conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might 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 results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.