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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or 프라그마틱 무료 video recordings. However, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험, Https://Clashofcryptos.Trade, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs 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 think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though 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 identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that 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 aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow 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 an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based 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 showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had reached 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 to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.