• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

A recent study used a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized hints less 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). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 순위 Z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required 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 despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited a strong tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.