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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, 프라그마틱 슬롯 it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 라이브 카지노 (Appc.cctvdgrw.com) then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 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 a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. They described, for example how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, 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 L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.