• 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 their own resistance to change and the social ties they had access to were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 슬롯 추천 - bookmarkpath.Com - RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and benefits. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing 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, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and 프라그마틱 추천 its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and 프라그마틱 게임 pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.