• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully 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. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in 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 resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 penalties that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for 프라그마틱 정품인증 official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore it will assist 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 risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, 프라그마틱 무료체험 such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader 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 revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 정품 (this contact form) third year of university and were aiming for level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect 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 do this.