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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect 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 such as politeness, 프라그마틱 정품인증 슬롯 사이트; Valetinowiki.Racing, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required 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 discovered that the CLKs frequently used phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 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 were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and 프라그마틱 슬롯 multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method uses numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study complicated or unique topics 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 allow you to determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general 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, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.