• 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 their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example, cited their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. 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 efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, 슬롯 and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 무료체험 Z-tests. It was discovered 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 led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

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

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced 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 testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test showed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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 at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.