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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally, the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They aren't always accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in 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. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 무료게임 linguistic standards of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior 프라그마틱 정품 of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For 프라그마틱 플레이 instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and 프라그마틱 정품 therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.