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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for 라이브 카지노 instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

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

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized a DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 정품 (enbbs.instrustar.com) and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely 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 L2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, 프라그마틱 슬롯 (Yxhsm.Net) MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and think they are incompetent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, 프라그마틱 무료 a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

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

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.