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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences CLKs' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they could draw on were significant. The RIs from TS and ZL for instance mentioned their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their rational decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on pragmatic important topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. For instance the DCT cannot take into account cultural and personal variations in communication. The DCT can also be biased and can lead to overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed prior to using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 이미지 정품인증 (continue reading this) information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers understand the role of prosody in communication across different cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT is now one of the most significant instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate various issues such as politeness, turn taking, and lexical selection. It can be used to determine the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to assess EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given an array of scenarios and were asked to choose the appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as form and content. These criterion are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test creators. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally-indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), 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 consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs often chose to defy native Korean pragmatism norms. Their choices were influenced by four factors: their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed first to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the selections were compared with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. Interviewees were also required to explain why they chose an atypical behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. The CLKs were discovered to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This was probably due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to a lack of understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to converge towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms while in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their logical resistance to every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two coders who were independent. The coding process was an iterative process in which the coders listened and discussed each transcript. The coding results are then contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners are hesitant to adhere to native-speaker pragmatic norms. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. The participants consisted of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were required to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or their 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 CLKs, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 정품 사이트; read on, 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 resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatism resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life histories. They also spoke of external factors like relational advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic norms of their university.

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

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료게임 - read on - Korean learners. They may still be useful for official Korean proficiency testing. Future researchers should reconsider the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will allow them to better understand the impact of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students from L2. Additionally it will assist educators to develop more effective methodologies to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to explore a particular subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources like interviews, observations, and documents, to prove its findings. This type of investigation is useful for examining unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

The first step in the case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for research and which could be left out. It is also useful to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject. It will also help put the issue within a larger theoretical framework.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its specific benchmarks for Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly vulnerable to native models. They tended to select wrong answer options that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency of adding their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving a hypothetical interaction with their interactants and were asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personalities. TS for instance stated that she was difficult to talk to and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.