• 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 learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, 프라그마틱 and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 체험 RIs. The participants were comprised 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 their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and 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 even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relational advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by 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 imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, 프라그마틱 순위 슬롯 하는법 (mouse click the next web site) TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.