• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, 라이브 카지노 (his comment is here) turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise and 프라그마틱 순위 could misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and 프라그마틱 추천 무료체험 슬롯버프 (bookmark-vip.Com) discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of 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 research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. This method uses numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.