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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they had access to were significant. Researchers from TS & ZL for instance, cited their local professor relationship as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or 프라그마틱 무료체험 (more..) more steps could be a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to examine various aspects that include the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with an array of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed with specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise, and they could misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal competence.

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 DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to identify the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared to their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack experience with the target languages, which led to an insufficient understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or diverging from both L1 and 프라그마틱 추천 L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders and 프라그마틱 이미지 then coded. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and 프라그마틱 카지노 환수율 (more..) discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms 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 worried that their native friends may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test korea 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 investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced 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 achieve level six on their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and understanding and pragmatic awareness.

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.