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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to draw on relational affordances as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as a major factor in their pragmatic choice to avoid criticising a strict professor (see example 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The test for discourse completion (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Furthermore, the DCT can be biased and could cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it must be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and 프라그마틱 카지노 information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence the social variables that are related to politeness can be a strength. This feature can help researchers to study the role played by prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a key issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics DCT is one of the most effective tools for analyzing communication behaviors of learners. It can be used to analyze various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and lexical choices. It can also be used to determine the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research used the DCT as tool to evaluate the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and then asked to choose the appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more effective than other methods for refusing like videos or questionnaires. Researchers warned, however, that the DCT must be used with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They are not always accurate and may misrepresent the way ELF learners actually respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email versus those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized more hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study looked at Chinese learners their pragmatic choices when they use Korean. It employed various tools for experimentation such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions, and Refusal Interviews. The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their current lives as well as their relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' pragmatic choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they were indicative of resistance to pragmatics. In addition, the interviewees were asked to explain their choices of behavior in a given scenario.

The results of the MQs, 무료 프라그마틱 DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and z tests. It was discovered that the CLKs often resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of experience with the target language which led to a lack of understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 varied depending on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14 they preferred converging 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 transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The code was re-coded repeatedly, with the coders re-reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, giving an indication of how well the RIs captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

The most important issue in research on pragmatics is: why do some learners decide to not accept native-speaker norms? Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs 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, on average, 프라그마틱 정품확인 홈페이지 (Daoqiao.Net) the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also mentioned external factors like relational advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance in relation to the intercultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed their concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to when their social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might perceive them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This worry was similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the default preference for Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the classroom behavior and interactions of students in L2. Moreover this will allow educators to develop more effective methodologies for teaching and testing the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a strategy that utilizes in-depth, participant-centered investigations to explore a particular subject. This method uses multiple data sources including interviews, observations, and documents to support its findings. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

In a case study the first step is to define both the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to review the existing literature to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment showed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to choose wrong answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, 프라그마틱 무료스핀 (Https://Maps.Google.Com.Lb/) further reducing their response quality.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their counterparts and were asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making demands. Interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload despite the fact that she believed that native Koreans would do this.