자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to make use of relational affordances and learning-internal factors, were significant. RIs from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some disadvantages. The DCT for instance, 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 정품인증 - from lovewiki.faith - does not take into account individual and cultural differences. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 (Full File) research or assessment.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 무료게임 (from lovewiki.faith) more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other data collection methods.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were a sign of a pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with 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 a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 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 own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required 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 disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. They outlined, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or consequences they might face if their local social norms were not followed. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

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 uses numerous sources of data to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject are important to study and which could be left out. It is also beneficial to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built 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 the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, which were not based on precise pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

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

The interviewees were given two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to talk to and refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.