• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. For instance the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and may result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not necessarily precise, and 프라그마틱 정품인증 (Bbs.yunduost.com) they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more research into different methods to assess refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as 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 asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 their current life histories, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 in a specific scenario.

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 was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to 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, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors like relational affordances. They described, for example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also useful to read the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.