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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study employed a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 정품인증 (https://git.Openprivacy.ca/restoutput78) L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for 라이브 카지노 converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 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 their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. 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 in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.