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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (Http://www.Donggoudi.com/) which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most 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 must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and 프라그마틱 환수율 RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: 프라그마틱 환수율 their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

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 euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 discussed each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews for 프라그마틱 무료 refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including documents, interviews, and observations, to confirm its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built 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 study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.