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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For 프라그마틱 정품인증 데모 - yd.Yichang.cc, instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the 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 the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study used an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every 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 coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 슬롯버프, top article, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that were similar to natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information like interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.