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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT for instance, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 정품확인 - https://linkvault.win/story.php?title=10-things-we-all-we-hate-about-pragmatic-free-Slot-buff - is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study employed a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, 프라그마틱 이미지 무료체험 슬롯버프 (relevant site) in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.