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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 (Enbbs.instrustar.Com) instance the RIs from TS and 라이브 카지노 ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 라이브 카지노 but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for 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 alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. 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 primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test creators. 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 investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by 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 favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of 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 transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature 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 for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were aiming for level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.