자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships and the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published 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 the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, 프라그마틱 추천 이미지 (Networkbookmarks.Com) the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the use of lexical terms. It can also be used to assess the phonological difficulty of learners their speech.

Recent research used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 환수율 the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined 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 was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on 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 the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

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

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including interviews, observations, and documents to confirm its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine specific or complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to clearly define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, thereby ignoring precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second year at university and hoped to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a heavy work load, even though she thought native Koreans would.