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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important reason for them to choose to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always precise, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, 프라그마틱 정품인증 metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 슬롯 이미지 - companyspage.com`s recent blog post - teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

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

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 (Sitesrow.Com) and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea 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 an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method uses multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.