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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has some drawbacks. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for 프라그마틱, please click the next website page, research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 무료체험 슬롯버프 (Sound-Social.Com) the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 무료 슬롯 - Mysocialfeeder.Com - were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.