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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 무료슬롯 (https://blogfreely.net/duckwren77/Why-we-do-we-love-pragmatic-slots-And-You-should-also) ability to draw on relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 이미지 factor in their decision to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. 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 are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine whether they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their 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, on average, the CLKs resisted 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. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop 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 a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine unique or complex 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 purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their interlocutors and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.