• 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 factors, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the social ties they were able to draw from were crucial. RIs from TS & ZL, for example were able to cite their relationships with their local professors as the primary reason for their pragmatic decision to avoid criticising a strict prof (see examples 2).

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

Discourse Construction Tests

The discourse completion test is a common tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could lead to overgeneralizations. It is essential to analyze it carefully before being used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a useful instrument to study the relationship between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. Its ability in two or more stages to influence social variables related to politeness is a plus. This characteristic can be utilized to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT is now one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. It can be used to investigate various aspects such as politeness, 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯 turn taking, and lexical choice. It can also be used to assess the phonological complexity of learners speaking.

Recent research used an DCT as tool to evaluate the ability to resist of EFL students. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the choices provided. The authors found the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal like the use of a questionnaire or video recordings. However, they cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of data collection methods.

DCTs are often created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and is based on the assumptions made by the test designers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing the way ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more research on alternative methods of measuring refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests made by students via email with the responses gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCTs favored more direct and conventionally indirect requests and utilized less hints than email data.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners' decisions regarding their use of Korean by using a range of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to think about their evaluations and refusal performances in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often chose to reject native Korean norms of pragmatism. Their decisions were influenced primarily by four factors that included their personalities and multilingual identities, their current life histories and their relational affordances. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was first analyzed to identify the participants' choices in practice. The data was categorized according 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 pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their choice of pragmatic behavior in a specific situation.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analysed using descriptive statistics and Z tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an inadequate understanding of the korean pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 norms or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varies according to the DCT situations. In the scenarios 3 and 12 CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs favored convergence 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 of the participants had completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribing, and then coded by two independent coders. The coders worked in an iterative manner and involved the coders reading and discussing each transcript. The results of the coding process are evaluated against the original RI transcripts to determine how well they reflected the actual behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research attempted to answer this question using several experimental tools including DCTs MQs and 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯버프 (Recommended Internet site) RIs. Participants comprised 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 asked to think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they could produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their decision to learner-internal factors like their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors such as relational affordances. They outlined, for instance, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to function more easily in terms of the linguistic and cultural expectations of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and punishments they could face if they flouted the local social norms. They were worried that their native interactants might consider them "foreigners" and believe that they are incompetent. This is similar to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These results suggest that native-speaker practical norms are no longer the preferred choice of Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in various cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand the effects of different cultures on the behavior of students and classroom interactions of students from L2. Additionally, 프라그마틱 슈가러쉬 this will help educators 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 an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is useful when analyzing specific or complex subjects that are difficult to quantify using other methods.

In a case study, the first step is to define both the subject and the goals of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are essential for investigation and which ones can be omitted. It is also helpful to study the research to gain a broad understanding of the subject and place the situation in a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50] and 프라그마틱 슬롯 환수율 슈가러쉬 (head to maps.google.com.sl) its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the experiment revealed that L2 Korean students were extremely susceptible to native models. They tended to select wrong answers that were literal interpretations of the prompts, deviating from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This lowered the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and were asked to select one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasoning behind their choice. The majority of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, 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, even though she believed that native Koreans would ask.