자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and learner-internal elements, 프라그마틱 플레이 were important. RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as a key factor in their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths however, it also has its disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. Additionally the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers study 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' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like the content and the form. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods of assessing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 카지노 [Http://Www.1V34.Com/] and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to reflect on their evaluation and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' actual choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic 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 is likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which resulted in an inadequate understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 불법, https://telegra.ph, to converge towards L1 varied depending on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 to complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic 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 relational advantages. They also discussed, for instance, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are unintelligent. This was a concern similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods to assess.

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 identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four on 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 respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, as well as pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. The interviewees were asked to justify their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.