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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising an uncompromising professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the practical important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a commonly used instrument in pragmatic research. It has many strengths but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 result in overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This characteristic can be utilized to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most effective tools used to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate phonological complexity in learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the refusal skills of EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, 프라그마틱 슬롯 추천 and then asked to select the most appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures, including a questionnaire and video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods for data collection.

DCTs are usually created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test developers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent how ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally-indirect request forms and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed various experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life histories, as well as their relationships. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed first to determine the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were matched with their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This could be due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research tools, such as DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to perform the DCTs in their native language and to complete the 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 CLKs, on average, did not follow the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 환수율; you could check here, penalties they might face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors may view them as "foreignersand consider them unintelligent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Moreover it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research strategy that utilizes deep, participatory investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that uses multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

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 what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to read the literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the situation within a larger theoretical framework.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, which were not based on the correct pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had reached level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding understanding of the world.

The interviewees were given two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.