• 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. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot account for the 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 it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were 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. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 추천 (browse around this web-site) Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 무료게임 z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. 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 CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and 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 resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk 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 various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.