• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances as well as learner-internal elements, were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance mentioned their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and can result in overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

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

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, 프라그마틱 이미지 슬롯무료 [http://www.0551Gay.Com/space-uid-368535.html] like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and traditionally indirect request forms, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range 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 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 primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and 프라그마틱 정품 사이트 relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be 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 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 프라그마틱 추천 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relationship affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the default preference for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to analyze specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case 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 the study revealed that L2 Korean students were particularly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, 프라그마틱 무료게임 their pragmatic awareness and understanding and their knowledge of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.