• 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 the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they could draw on were significant. For instance, RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important reason for them to choose to not criticize the strictness of a professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural differences. The DCT can also be biased and lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable instrument to study the connection between prosody, information structure, and 프라그마틱 무료슬롯 순위 (Minecraftcommand.Science) non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect politeness in two or more steps could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study numerous issues, like the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners' speech.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs are usually designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could be misleading about the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for measuring refusal competence.

In a recent study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses of an oral DCT. The results revealed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate ability who provided responses to DCTs and MQs. 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 pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current life experiences as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' practical choices. 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 are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 슬롯 in a specific scenario.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to differ from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days of the participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. The coders worked in an iterative manner by the coders, re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted 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 why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question using a variety of experimental instruments, 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 either in their L1 or L2 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did so even though they could produce native-like patterns. In addition, they were conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal aspects such as their identities, personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also mentioned external factors, like relationship affordances. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could face if they flouted their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends would consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature 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 a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the validity of these tests in different cultural contexts and specific situations. This will help them better understand the effect of different cultural contexts on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students in L2. This will also aid educators develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that employs participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to help support the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to study specific or 프라그마틱 이미지 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 (mouse click the following internet site) complicated issues that are difficult to other methods to measure.

In a case study the first step is to define the subject as well as the goals of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important for research and which are best left out. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the topic and place the case within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that the L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, 프라그마틱 무료 which were not based on the correct 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.

The participants of this study were all L2 Korean students who had attained level four on the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness and understanding and knowledge of the world.

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each of which involved an imagined interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to employ when making a request. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and therefore did not want to inquire about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do so.