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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their relationship with their local professor as a major factor in their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 공식홈페이지 - recent post by Metooo, non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used a DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given various scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They may not be precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료 utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for 프라그마틱 정품인증 reflections on their opinions and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors that included their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to converge towards L1 varied depending 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 revealed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders, were then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews for refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to consider their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they could produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors like relational affordances. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures and penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in various contexts. This will help them better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. This method makes use of numerous sources of information including documents, interviews, and observations to confirm its findings. This type of investigation is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained 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 questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and she therefore did not want to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would ask.