• 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 learner-internal elements, were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example, the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 individual differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can result in overgeneralizations. Therefore, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This ability 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 to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

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

DCTs can be designed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and 프라그마틱 정품인증 based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). 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 프라그마틱 불법 무료스핀, Bookmarkbells.Com, refusal performances in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a given scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in various contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to 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 technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.