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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

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, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and 프라그마틱 추천 non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to analyze numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research has used the DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 정품 사이트 (visit web site) such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders independent of each other, 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about 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 could create native-like patterns. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text 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 attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work, even though she believed native Koreans would.