자유게시판

• 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 relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before using it for 슬롯 (Https://pragmatickrcom46666.blogthisbiz.com/36000391/10-tips-to-know-About-pragmatic-free-Slots) research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness could be a benefit. This ability can be used to study the role of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers discovered that 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 employed with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test designers. They are not necessarily precise, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 정품 슬롯 하는법 (mouse click the up coming document) we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent and then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors such as relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for 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 investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject are important for research and which can be omitted. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached the level of four in 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 to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For 프라그마틱 카지노 불법 (he has a good point) instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.