• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "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 to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally it will assist educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based 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 strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method makes use of various sources of data, such as documents, interviews, 프라그마틱 무료게임 and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and 프라그마틱 무료 the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained 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 asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.