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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 무료 can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most effective tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study used a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. 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 effective than other refusal methods, such as the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify 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 made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases 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 showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 홈페이지 (mouse click the up coming post) and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not conform to the patterns 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 aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, like relational advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were unintelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

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 uses various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to analyze unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료게임 (mouse click the up coming post) which further hampered the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 in their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do so.