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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

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

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as an instrument to test the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 무료 슬롯버프 (mouse click the following article) their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given 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 used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For 라이브 카지노 (Techdirt.Stream) example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study attempted to answer this question employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked think about 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 when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 무료체험 메타, simply click the up coming website page, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relations with their professors enabled 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 punishments they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.