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

• 페이스북 공유
• 트위터 공유
• 

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal influences, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relationship advantages they could draw on were important. RIs from TS & ZL, for example, cited their relationships with their local professors as a key factor in their pragmatic decision to avoid criticizing a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on key pragmatic issues such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in pragmatic research. It has numerous advantages, but it also has some drawbacks. For example it is that the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communicative behavior. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT can be biased and may lead to overgeneralizations. It should be carefully analyzed before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability of the DCT in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness could be a benefit. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary tools to analyze learners' behaviors in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of the learners their speech.

A recent study used a DCT to test EFL students' ability to resist. The participants were given various scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options offered. The researchers found the DCT to be more effective than other refusal methods, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT must be employed with caution. They also suggested using other data collection methods.

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like form and content. These criterion are intuitive and based on the assumptions of the test creators. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more investigation into alternative methods of testing refusal competence.

A recent study examined DCT responses to requests submitted by students through email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT was more direct and conventionally form-based requests and 프라그마틱 슬롯 체험 made a less frequent use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean through a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper intermediate level who answered DCTs, MQs, and RIs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to reject native Korean pragmatism norms. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current lives and their relationship affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to determine the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the responses were compared with their linguistic performance in the DCTs to determine whether they were a reflection of pragmatic resistance or not. Interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. It was found that CLKs frequently resorted to the use of euphemistic phrases such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, which led to an insufficient knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preference to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12, the CLKs preferred to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms while in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs showed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one within two days after the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were transcribed and recorded by two independent coders, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 were then coded. Coding was an iterative process, in which the coders read and discussed each transcript. The results of coding are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by employing a variety of research 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. They were then invited to an RI, where they were asked to reflect and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not conform to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. Furthermore, they were clearly aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their resistance to learner-internal variables such as their personality and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, like relationship benefits. They also discussed, for instance how their interactions with their professors helped them to perform more comfortably in terms of the cultural and linguistic standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their local friends might think they are "foreigners" and believe they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns 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 still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should reassess the applicability of these tests in different contexts and in particular situations. This will help them better comprehend how different environments can affect the pragmatic behavior of L2 learners in the classroom and beyond. Additionally, this will help educators create more effective methods to teach and test korea pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that focuses on deep, participatory investigations to study a specific subject. This method utilizes multiple data sources including documents, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 interviews, and observations to prove its findings. This type of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique issues that are difficult to other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones are best left out. It is also useful to read the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the case in a wider theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50], and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and 프라그마틱 환수율 LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this study showed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, thereby ignoring the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This also lowered the quality of their answers.

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

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios which involved interactions with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the strategies below to use when making an offer. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatic resistance to their personality. TS for instance, claimed that she was difficult to get along with and was hesitant to inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.