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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 슬롯 팁 (https://opensourcebridge.science/) the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and 프라그마틱 이미지 could cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 플레이 turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences, as well as their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, 프라그마틱 사이트 the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Interviews with Refusal

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 프라그마틱 플레이 45 KNSs 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 required to 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 responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, such as relational benefits. They described, for example how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to 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 to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.