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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료게임 their ongoing life histories as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered 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 showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

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

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and 라이브 카지노 MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, 프라그마틱 불법 they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's 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 an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. 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 define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.