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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to draw on relational affordances, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their local professor relationship as a major 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 factor 프라그마틱 카지노 in their rational decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor 프라그마틱 사이트 슬롯 조작 (click the next site) (see example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communication across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study a variety of issues that include politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological difficulty of learners speaking.

A recent study utilized a DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be employed with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test creators. They may not be precise, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in actual interactions. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and 프라그마틱 체험 (just click the up coming site) MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, and relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a given situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were evaluated against the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research attempted to answer this question by using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs, on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to create patterns that resembled native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if they violated their social norms. They were worried that their native friends might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer 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 usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will help them better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also aid educators create better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to help support the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful for examining complicated or unique subjects that are difficult to quantify with other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic should be studied and which aspects can be left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely dependent on the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Moreover, the participants of this study were L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) in their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personality. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.