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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has its disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They aren't always correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 (https://www.google.fm/url?q=https://Bbs.Pku.edu.cn/v2/jump-to.php?url=https://pragmatickr.com/) as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings 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 could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by 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 showed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 추천 transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms 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 local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.