• 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 and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 정품확인 (read the full info here) Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose 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 relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료 - click the up coming web site, 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 on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could be subject to if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were required 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 imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.