• 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 social ties they could draw on were important. The RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 슬롯 추천 (mouse click the next article) their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT cannot take into account the cultural and individual differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This can assist researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as manner of speaking, turn-taking, 프라그마틱 체험 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 (simply click the following internet site) and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing, such as videos or questionnaires. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performances in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they were a sign of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The 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 if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key question in pragmatic research is: 프라그마틱 무료체험 Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 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 CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to investigate a particular 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.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words 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 attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding and their knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imaginary interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.