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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were crucial. The RIs from TS and ZL, for example, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

Recent research used the DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and 프라그마틱 환수율 L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. Coding 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.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their relations with their professors enabled them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 공식홈페이지 (please click the following webpage) thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their response quality.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, 프라그마틱 플레이 정품 확인법 (Images.Google.Ad) and therefore was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.