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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a major factor in their decision to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with various scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually 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 through email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 게임 (Read More In this article) traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was first analyzed to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) 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 a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then 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 was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 순위 (https://www.google.pl/Url?q=https://Stairways.wiki/wiki/A_An_Instructional_Guide_To_Pragmatic_Slot_Buff_From_Beginning_To_End) discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question by using various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. They also discussed, for 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 (Heavenarticle.com) instance how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of 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 an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore 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 research can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their quality of response.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.