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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 the relational affordances they had access to were crucial. Researchers from TS and ZL for instance were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticism of a strict professor (see example 2).

This article examines all local research on Korean published up to 2020. It focuses on key practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages but it also has a few disadvantages. The DCT for instance, does not take into account individual and cultural variations. Furthermore, the DCT is prone to bias and may cause overgeneralizations. This is why it must be carefully analyzed before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations the DCT can be a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to examine various aspects, including politeness, turn taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from, and then asked to select the appropriate response. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures such as a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They are not always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more research into different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners' pragmatic choices when using Korean. It used various tools for experimentation including Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their opinions and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors that included their personalities, their multilingual identities, ongoing life histories, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 and relationship benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were examined to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were compared to their linguistic performance in DCTs to determine if they reflected pragmatic resistance or not. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and 프라그마틱 무료스핀 z-tests were 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, which led to an inadequate understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 norms or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms differed based on the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, then coded by two independent coders. The coding process was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of the coding process are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews for refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by employing a variety of research instruments, 프라그마틱 순위 including DCTs MQs, DCTs and RIs. Participants comprised 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs either in their L1 or L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked consider their responses to the DCT situations.

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 could create native-like patterns. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing lives. They also mentioned external factors, like relational affordances. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to an easier performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subject to if they violated their local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe 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 may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor to Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based out of Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation is ideal for studying unique or complex subjects which are difficult to assess using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic should be studied and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad 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 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 were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, which further hampered their response quality.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had reached level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their second or third university year and were aiming to achieve level six on their next attempt. They were questioned about their WTC/SPCC, pragmatic awareness, understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making demands. They were then asked to explain the reasons behind their decision. Most participants attributed their pragmatic opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to talk to, and she therefore was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having the burden of a job despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.