자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, 프라그마틱 추천 (www.metooo.co.uk) but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for cultural and personal differences in communication. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it is important to analyze it carefully prior to using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools used for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to examine various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners speaking.

A recent study used a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be precise and could misrepresent how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of different methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and traditionally indirect requests and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used 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 asked to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four primary factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed 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, then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was iterative, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results were then contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked 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 responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that closely resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. 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 norm for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore, this will help educators develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information, such as documents, interviews, and observations to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered 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, 프라그마틱 게임 and were aiming to reach level 6 on their next attempt. They were required to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with the burden of a job, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.