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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships and learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance, the DCT cannot account for cultural and individual variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study a variety of issues, including the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized a DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. The participants were given a list of scenarios and asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. However, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 the researchers warned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as design and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research into alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students through email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four main factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) 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 were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine how well they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or L2. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 무료 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트버프 (lzdsxxb.com write an article) cultural expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreigners" and think they were ignorant. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments could affect the practical behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs deep, participatory investigations to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential to study and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and to place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that the L2 Korean students were particularly vulnerable to native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained the level of four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third year of university and were hoping to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to approach and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.