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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the relationship advantages they had access to were important. Researchers from TS & ZL, for example mentioned their relationship with their local professor as the primary reason for their decision to stay clear of criticising a strict prof (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on pragmatic core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has some drawbacks. For instance the DCT is unable to account for cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore the DCT is susceptible to bias and can lead to overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before being used for research or assessment.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to manipulate the social variables that are related to politeness could be a benefit. This can assist researchers to study the role played by prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most significant tools for analyzing learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects, including politeness, turn-taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study used the DCT to assess EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were given a set of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more efficient than other methods of refusal such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other data collection methods.

DCTs can be designed using specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test designers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further studies of alternative methods of assessing the ability to refuse.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student requests via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when it comes to using Korean using a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) Metapragmatic Questionnaires, Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal performance in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four major factors that included their identities, their multilingual identities, ongoing lives, and their relational advantages. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was categorized according Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared the choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of a pragmatic resistance. Interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior 프라그마틱 게임 무료 (More inspiring ideas) in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which resulted in an inadequate knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preference for converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their own pragmatism in each DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants having completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process were compared to the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key issue in research on pragmatics is: Why do certain learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or their L2. They were then invited to an RI, where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not follow the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they were able to produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were also conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and affordances. They described, for example, how their interactions with their professors helped them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and social standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and penalties they could face when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their local friends might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they are not intelligent. This is similar to that 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 testing. But it would be prudent for future researchers to revisit their usefulness in particular situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effect of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. This will also help educators improve their methods of 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 a method that focuses on in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

In a case study, the first step is to define the subject as well as the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly dependent on the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answers which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their responses.

Additionally, the participants in this case study were L2 Korean learners who had achieved level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타, metooo.Io, third year of university and were hoping to achieve level 6 on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, 프라그마틱 카지노 each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. Interviewees were then asked to justify their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personalities. TS, for example stated that she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load, even though she believed native Koreans would.