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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they had access to were important. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 (this hyperlink) however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences, as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and 프라그마틱 데모 홈페이지 (git.thatsverys.Us) DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that 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 resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do some learners refuse to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect on and 프라그마틱 정품인증 discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing lives. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. They outlined, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential 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 subject and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and therefore refused to ask about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would ask.