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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. The RIs from TS & ZL for 프라그마틱 무료체험 instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to assess phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research used a DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 (Https://www.google.Pt/url?q=Http://nutris.net/members/cubjuice4/activity/1839518/) think they were unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the pragmatic behavior and 프라그마틱 데모 classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for 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 an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which are best left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

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

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.