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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. 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. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to 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 also revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was iterative by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs MQs, 프라그마틱 카지노 불법 (Read the Full Post) DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and 프라그마틱 불법 이미지 - https://maps.google.com.qa/, MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subject to if they violated the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure 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 help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.