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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For example, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT was more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 순위 (www.google.Co.ao) where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, 프라그마틱 사이트 did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, 라이브 카지노 the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.