• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 추천 [https://ok-social.com/story3447775/are-you-sick-of-pragmatic-product-authentication-10-inspirational-resources-to-revive-your-love-for-pragmatic-product-authentication] RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had 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 discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity 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 diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their 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 resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and 프라그마틱 순위 이미지 (https://thefairlist.com/story8118540/20-insightful-quotes-on-pragmatic-Genuine) specific situations. This will allow them to better comprehend how different environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best 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 conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. 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 an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.