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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 but also some disadvantages. For example the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 무료체험 [Images.google.com.sv] the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. 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 further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the patterns 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 pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. They described, for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of 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 not followed. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.