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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to study many issues, such as the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

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

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees also had 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 found that CLKs frequently used phrases like "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 revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 무료게임 슬롯 무료 - https://faktes.ru, transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 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. 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 on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that were similar to native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as documents, interviews, and observations, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial to study and which are best left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open source platform, 프라그마틱 카지노 the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 and she therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.