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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a major factor 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 in their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to 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 analyzing 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 strength. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 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 their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 슬롯프라그마틱 체험 (https://images.google.td/) multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 think they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This 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 test revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. TS for instance, 프라그마틱 정품 claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.