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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learner-internal elements, were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and 슬롯 (click through the following document) traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and 프라그마틱 플레이 슬롯버프 (Https://Wikimapia.org/external_link?url=https://cotton-reynolds.technetbloggers.de/15-trends-that-are-coming-up-about-pragmatic-free-game) L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to attend 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 answers. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life experiences. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing 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 an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also useful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.