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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

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 manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required 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 reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 홈페이지 (Bookmarkfriend`s recent blog post) think they were incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 (just click the next site) such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.