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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages 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 the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account cultural and individual differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 can lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or 프라그마틱 게임 for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study employed an DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires further studies of different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 무료 utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 게임 (Https://hikvisiondb.webcam/) teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections 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 justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked to reflect on 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 this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred external factors, like relational affordances. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better know how different cultures could affect the practical behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean 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 employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform that is 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 extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.