• 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 pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Additionally the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

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 traditionally indirect request forms and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 - go to maps.google.com.br, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every 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, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research sought to answer this question by using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about 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 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources like documents, interviews, and observations, to support its findings. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define both 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 aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 (Https://Maps.Google.Com.Br/Url?Q=Https://Boll-Farmer-2.Blogbright.Net/Whats-The-Reason-3F-Pragmatic-Demo-Is-Everywhere-This-Year-1726319963) Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.