• 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' understanding of the need to be pragmatic and the social ties they were able to draw from were important. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both have cited their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize an uncompromising professor (see the example 2).

This article examines all local pragmatic research on Korean published until 2020. It focuses on practical fundamental topics like:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test is a popular tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has some disadvantages. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. As a result, it should be analyzed carefully prior to using it for research or for 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 프라그마틱 무료 슬롯게임 (Twizax.org) assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool to investigate the relationship between prosody, information structure and non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate the social variables that are relevant to politeness in two or more steps could be a plus. This feature can help researchers study the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, which is a major issue in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field linguistics, DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to study various aspects such as the manner of speaking, turn taking and lexical selection. It can be used to evaluate the level of phonological sophistication in learners in their speech.

Recent research utilized the DCT as tool to evaluate the refusal skills of EFL students. The participants were given various scenarios and were required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors concluded that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. The researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs can be designed with specific requirements for linguistics, such as the form and content. These criteria are based on intuition and based on the assumptions of test developers. They may not be accurate, and they may incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interaction. This issue calls for further research on different methods to assess refusal competence.

In a recent research study, DCT responses to student inquiries via email were compared with the responses from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT encouraged more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and a lower use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study investigated Chinese learners making pragmatic choices when using Korean. It employed a variety of experimental tools such as Discourse Completion Tasks, metapragmatic questions and Refusal Interviews. Participants were 46 CLKs with intermediate or higher ability who responded to MQs and DCTs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results indicated that the CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and their decisions were influenced by four major factors: their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, 프라그마틱 순위 정품 (click over here) and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data were classified according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on DCTs in order to determine if they are indicative of resistance to pragmatics. Additionally, the participants were asked to explain their decision to use pragmatic language in a specific scenario.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were examined using descriptive statistics and z tests. It was found that CLKs often resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of experience 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 2 norms or to be more convergent towards L1 norms varied based on the DCT circumstances. For instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs would prefer to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs further revealed that the CLKs were aware their pragmatism in every DCT situation. RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. The coding process was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of coding were compared to the original RI transcripts, which provided an indication of how well the RIs accurately portrayed the core behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

One of the major questions in pragmatic research is the reason why learners choose to resist the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using several experimental tools, including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 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 levels. They were then invited to an RI where they were required to reflect on and discuss their responses to each DCT situation.

The results showed that CLKs on average, did not adhere to the norms of native speakers in more than 40 percent of their responses. They did this despite the fact that they could produce patterns that closely resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal factors like their personalities and identities that are multilingual, as well as ongoing life histories. They also referred external factors, 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 like relationship advantages. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors helped facilitate an easier performance in regards to the linguistic and intercultural standards of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could face in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreignersand believe that they are incompetent. This concern was similar to those voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They may still be useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. However, it is prudent for future researchers to reconsider their usefulness in particular situations and in various contexts. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultural environments on the classroom behavior and interactions of L2 students. Moreover this will allow educators to create more effective methods for teaching and testing the korea's pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor at Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consultancy based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs intensive, participant-centered research to investigate a specific topic. It is a method that utilizes various sources of information to back up the findings, such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of research is ideal for studying specific or complex subjects which are difficult to assess with other methods.

The first step in a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad understanding of the subject and to place the case study within a wider theoretical framework.

This case study was built on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], as well as its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study revealed that L2 Korean learners were particularly susceptible to the influence of native models. They tended to choose wrong answer options, which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also had an unnatural tendency to include their own text, or "garbage," to their responses, further detracting from the quality of their responses.

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 at university and hoped to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as understanding and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two scenarios, each involving an imaginary interaction with their co-workers and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making an inquiry. They were then asked to provide the reasons behind their decision. The majority of participants attributed their pragmatist opposition to their personality. TS, for example said she was difficult to talk to and would not ask about the wellbeing of her colleague when they were working at a high rate despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.