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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' understanding and ability to make use of relational affordances and 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 decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all locally published pragmatic research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on core pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a commonly used tool in pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has a few drawbacks. For instance it is that the DCT is unable to account for the cultural and individual differences in communication. Additionally it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and could lead to overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the connection between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This ability can aid researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics, the DCT has become one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to analyze various issues, including politeness, turn-taking, and the use of lexical terms. It can be used to assess the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research has used an DCT as a tool to assess the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with a range of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also suggested using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test designers. They are not always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for 무료슬롯 프라그마틱 more research into different methods of assessing refusal ability.

In a recent study DCT responses to student requests via email were compared to those from an oral DCT. The results showed that DCTs preferred more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and used less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked for reflections on their assessments and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs frequently chose to reject native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their ongoing life experiences and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, 프라그마틱 슬롯무료 we compared the choices with their linguistic performance using DCTs to determine if they are indicative of pragmatic resistance. Additionally, the participants were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a particular situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and z tests. The CLKs were discovered to employ euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target languages, leading to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference for 프라그마틱 정품 확인법 슬롯 하는법 [https://madbookmarks.com/story18066280/why-you-should-be-working-on-This-pragmatic-genuine] converging to L1 or diverging from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs, which were recorded and transcribed by two coders independent of each other and then coded. The coding process was iterative and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of coding were contrasted with the original RI transcripts, which gave an indication of how the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is why learners choose to resist pragmatic norms that native speakers use. A recent study attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experimental tools, including DCTs, MQs, and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. Participants were asked to complete the DCTs and MQs in their L1 or L2. Then, they were invited to a RI where they were required to think about their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs resisted native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly conscious of their own pragmatism. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities, multilingual identities, and ongoing life histories. They also referred to external factors like relational benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and cultural norms at their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures and punishments that they could be subjected to if they strayed from their local social norms. They were concerned that their native counterparts may view them as "foreignersand believe that they are ignorant. This concern was similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are not the default preference of Korean learners. They could remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the validity of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better understand the effects of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. Furthermore this will allow educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth studies to study a specific subject. This method utilizes numerous sources of information, such as interviews, observations, and documents, to support its findings. This kind of research can be used to study specific or complicated subjects that are difficult for other methods to assess.

In a case study, the first step is to clearly define the subject and the purpose of the study. This will help you determine which aspects of the topic must be investigated and which aspects can be left out. It is also beneficial to study the literature to gain a general knowledge of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

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 revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answers, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviance from a precise pragmatic inference. They also showed an inclination to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing the quality of their responses.

The participants in this study were L2 Korean students who had achieved level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and were aiming to reach level six by their next attempt. They were asked to answer questions regarding their WTC/SPCC and pragmatic awareness and comprehension.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios involving an interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the strategies below to employ when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. For instance, TS claimed that she was difficult to connect to, and so she was reluctant to inquire about the health of her interlocutors despite having a heavy workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.