• 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 relationship advantages they had access to were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for 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 to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set 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, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 프라그마틱 무료스핀; https://qooh.Me/babyorgan72, 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

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

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, 프라그마틱 불법 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, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.