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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Additionally the DCT is prone to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. As a result, 프라그마틱 무료체험 정품 (timeoftheworld.date) it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 정품인증 the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used 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 also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and 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 linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. 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. The CLKs were found employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research sought to answer this question with various experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might 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 speakers' pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform, 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 select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and therefore did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.