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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they had access to were significant. RIs from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers understand 프라그마틱 홈페이지 the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

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

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding 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 at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging 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 favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted 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 in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were required to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.