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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, 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 a significant factor 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 in their decision to avoid expressing criticism of an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. The DCT is one example. It does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to manipulate social variables that affect the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the most important tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to examine various issues such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as an instrument to test the skills of refusal among EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the choices provided. The researchers found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test developers. They are not necessarily correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually refuse requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally form-based requests and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. Interviewees were also required to explain the reasons for choosing an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms - and L2-pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were transcribed and recorded by two coders who were independent, were then coded. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results were then compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behaviors.

Interviews for 프라그마틱 이미지 refusal

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. Recent research sought to answer this question using various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. The participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2 levels. Then, they were invited to attend a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their answers. They did this despite the fact that they could produce native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their decisions to learner-internal factors like their identities, personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They also discussed, for instance 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 expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties that they might be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were worried that their native friends may view them as "foreigners" and 프라그마틱 슬롯버프 정품인증 (https://techonpage.com/story3609384/why-everyone-is-talking-about-pragmatic-demo-right-now) think they were incompetent. This was a concern similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and 프라그마틱 슬롯 무료체험 Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speakers pragmatic norms aren't the norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reassess the usefulness of these tests in various cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of students in L2. 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 consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses 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 research is useful for examining unique or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to identify what aspects of the subject must be investigated and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to study the literature that is relevant to the subject to gain a greater understanding of the topic and place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was based on an open source platform such as 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 susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their quality of response.

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

Interviewees were presented with two hypothetical situations that involved interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making a demand. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with the burden of a job despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.