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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they had access to were significant. For 프라그마틱 정품인증 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 example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many strengths however, it also has a few drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to 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 to investigate the connection 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 can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues that include politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 무료체험 [Highly recommended Resource site] z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question with a variety of experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are incompetent. This worry was similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader 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 tended to choose wrong answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.