• 목록
• 답변
• 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 social ties they had access to were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their local professor relationship as a major 프라그마틱 순위 factor in their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. This is why it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a strength. This can assist researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

Recent research utilized an DCT as an instrument to test the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 무료체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 사이트 (Https://bookmarkingace.Com/) we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research has attempted to answer this question with several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. They described, for 프라그마틱 추천 무료게임 - Pragmatickr54208.Blogvivi.Com, example how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was based 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 revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their perception of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she believed native Koreans would.