• 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 their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they were able to draw from were significant. RIs from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticism of a strict professor (see examples 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, does not take into account individual and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료스핀 (recent Newsbloger blog post) cultural differences. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or 프라그마틱 불법 assessment.

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 in two or more stages to alter social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to examine various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choice. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study used the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as the content and the form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test designers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue requires more research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and utilized hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making 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 consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for 프라그마틱 이미지 choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and 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, which led to a lack of understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the 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 favored convergence to L1 norms.

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

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a range of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted 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. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their decision to learner-internal variables such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and benefits. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native friends would perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This worry was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their relevance in specific scenarios and in various cultural contexts. This will enable them to better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses various sources of data including interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject. It will also help place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 test showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year of university and were aiming for level 6 for 라이브 프라그마틱 카지노 - recent Newsbloger blog post, their next test. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to choose one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and so she did not want to inquire about the well-being of her friend with an intense workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do so.