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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

Recent research has used the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They aren't always accurate and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for 프라그마틱 무료스핀 L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used 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 understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. For 프라그마틱 카지노 instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that uses various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a lot of work, even though she thought native Koreans would.