자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relational affordances they could draw on were important. For 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant reason for them to choose to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. Therefore, it is important to analyze it carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

A recent study used an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given a list of scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and 프라그마틱 추천 정품확인 (simply click the up coming article) Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. 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 the DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that CLKs frequently used 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 led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coders worked in an iterative manner, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 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 attend a RI where they were asked think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators develop better methods for 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 a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for research and which are best left out. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based 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 this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.