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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as a significant factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. Furthermore the DCT is prone to bias and may result in overgeneralizations. As a result, 프라그마틱 추천 it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate 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 presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and were then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs are often developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

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 the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Interviews for 프라그마틱 사이트 순위 (mysocialport.com) refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were asked to reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and 슬롯 benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 정품인증 linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and consequences that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

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

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.