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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and ability to tap into the benefits of relationships, as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on the practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular instrument in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. The DCT is one example. It is unable to account for cultural and individual variations. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used in research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool for investigating the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody across cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the primary tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of learners' speech.

A recent study employed an DCT to evaluate EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from and then asked to select the appropriate response. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may be misleading about the way ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect request forms and used hints less than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their assessments and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced primarily by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relationships. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine if they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choices of behavior in a particular situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to a lack of knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In Situations 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders and then coded. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how the RIs were able to capture the fundamental behaviors.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind native-speaker pragmatic norms. Recent research attempted to answer this question using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 프라그마틱 불법 슬롯 환수율 (followbookmarks.com) 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their first 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, on average, the CLKs rejected the pragmatic norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their answers. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled natives. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their identities, personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, such as relational affordances. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform better in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

However, the interviewees also expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they might face if they flouted their local social norms. They were concerned that their local friends might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in different cultural contexts. This will enable them to better comprehend how different environments could affect the practical behavior of students in the classroom and 프라그마틱 정품확인 - simply click the up coming internet page - beyond. Furthermore it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. This method utilizes various sources of data including interviews, observations and documents, to prove its findings. This kind of research is useful when analyzing unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature to gain a general understanding of the subject and place the situation in a wider theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely vulnerable to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer choices that were literal interpretations. This was a departure from the correct pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include 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 achieved level 4 on the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their third or second year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 for their next test. They were asked questions regarding their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding and understanding of the world.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors 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. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS for instance said she was difficult to get along with and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a lot of work despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.