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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were important. The RIs from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual differences. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness is a plus. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to study various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, they cautioned 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 the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess the ability to refuse.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to resist native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and 프라그마틱 슬롯 multilingual identities, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 their current life histories and their relationships. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

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

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently used euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism 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, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent, were then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results were then evaluated against the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The central problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do certain learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They also discussed, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic norms at their university.

However, 프라그마틱 슬롯체험 무료 프라그마틱체험 메타 (bookmarkspring.Com) the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends might perceive them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their relevance in specific scenarios and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations and documents, to support its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to read the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and put the issue in a wider theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called 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 learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had achieved 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 respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.