• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 정품인증 (Full Article) 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 often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 - our website - their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence 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 completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 추천 - Full Article - testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This 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 experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, 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. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and 프라그마틱 불법 was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.