• 목록
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 reason for them to choose to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is a widely used instrument in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT is susceptible to bias and can cause overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to alter the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods like a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 정품확인 z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or 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 L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Refusal Interviews

A key question of pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research has attempted to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. 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 rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their personality and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 슬롯 추천 (https://redhotbookmarks.com/story18253510/the-12-most-obnoxious-types-Of-the-twitter-accounts-that-you-follow) multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They could still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Additionally this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data, such as interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to examine specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a general understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at the end of their third or second year of university, and were aiming to reach level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, 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 a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.