• 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 and learner-internal elements, were important. Researchers from TS and ZL, for example were able to cite their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on the practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a commonly used tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT is susceptible to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a benefit. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is one of the most effective tools used to study the behavior of communication learners. It can be used to investigate various issues, including manner of speaking, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given a list of scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options provided. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are usually developed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test creators. They are not necessarily accurate, and they may misrepresent the way that ELF learners actually resist 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 via email versus the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and 프라그마틱 무료 used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It used a variety of experimental tools including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate who participated in MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were examined to identify the participants' rational choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and 프라그마틱 무료 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 led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed by two coders who were independent who then coded them. The code was re-coded repeatedly by the coders, re-reading and 슬롯 discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, 프라그마틱 이미지 체험 (Humanlove.Stream) giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, such as DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and 프라그마틱 무료 complete the MQs either in their L1 or their L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were asked to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

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 so even though they could produce native-like patterns. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their identities and personalities as well as multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance with respect to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

However, 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand consider them incompetent. This concern was similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the norm for Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. This will also help educators develop 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 a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to study a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to support the findings, including interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects that are difficult to measure using other methods.

The first step in conducting a case study is to define the subject matter and the purpose of the study. This will allow you to identify which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform that is the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its benchmarks that are specific to Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the 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 precise pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an inclination to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from their response quality.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations which involved interactions with their counterparts and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personality. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.