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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge 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 favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and 슬롯 in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and 프라그마틱 플레이 testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research 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 for examining unique or complex 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 objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.