자유게시판

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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' awareness of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance, the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool 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 could be a plus. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various aspects such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners in their speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and 프라그마틱 추천 정품확인방법 (https://www.google.mn/url?q=https://fenger-owen.blogbright.net/a-brief-history-of-pragmatic-free-slots-history-of-pragmatic-free-slots-1726718279) conventionally-indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs frequently 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 led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14, CLKs preferred convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major 프라그마틱 정품 슬롯 팁 (techdirt.stream) questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their first language and complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. This method uses numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This kind of research can be used to examine complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also useful to study the literature to gain a better knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.