• 목록
• 답변
• 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 relational affordances they could draw on were significant. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages however, it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, is unable to account for cultural and individual 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 assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness is a plus. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate a variety of issues, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can also be used to determine the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as videos or questionnaires. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually refuse requests in actual interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationships. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

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

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study sought to answer this question employing a range of experimental tools, 프라그마틱 이미지 including DCTs, MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs resisted the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to create patterns that resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational benefits. They described, for example, how their relations with their professors enabled them to perform better in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from the local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are not the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it would be prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of L2 students. Additionally, this will help educators 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 in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that focuses on intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. This method makes use of multiple data sources, such as interviews, observations and documents, to confirm its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 체험 (wzgroupup.hkhz76.badudns.Cc) the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject matter are crucial for 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 정품인증; Www.google.pt, investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also helpful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and put the issue in a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon 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 study revealed that L2 Korean learners were highly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to approach and 프라그마틱 환수율 refused to ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.