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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to learner-internal factors, CLKs' awareness of their own resistance to change and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were significant. 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 not criticize a strict professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on the most important practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests (DCTs)

The discourse completion test (DCT) is an instrument that is widely used in research that is based on pragmatic principles. It has many advantages, but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Additionally the DCT can be biased and may cause overgeneralizations. As a result, it is important to analyze it carefully before it is used for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT is a useful tool for investigating 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 is a plus. This feature can help researchers understand the role of prosody in communicating across cultural contexts, a major challenge in cross-cultural pragmatics.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the primary instruments for analyzing learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to investigate numerous issues, like manner of speaking, turn-taking, and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to determine phonological complexity in learners speaking.

A recent study employed an DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with a variety of scenarios to choose from and were then asked to select the most appropriate response. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other measures to stop people from refusing, including a questionnaire and video recordings. However, the researchers warned that the DCT should be used with caution and include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs can be developed using specific linguistic criteria, such as the form and content. These criteria are intuitive and are based on the assumptions of the test developers. They aren't always precise and could misrepresent the way ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires further research on alternative methods of assessing refusal ability.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' choices in their use of Korean using a variety of experimental tools, such as Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs), metapragmatic questionnaires, and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs with upper-intermediate proficiency who gave responses to DCTs and MQs. They were also required to provide reflections on their evaluations and refusals in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs frequently chose to resist native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four primary factors: their personalities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relational affordances. These findings have pedagogical consequences for L2 Korean assessment.

First, the MQ data were analyzed to identify the participants' choices in terms of their pragmatics. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, the choices were matched with their linguistic performance on the DCTs to determine whether they showed a pattern of resistance to pragmatics or not. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose the pragmatic approach in certain situations.

The results of the MQs and DCTs were then analyzed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic words like "sorry" or "thank you". This could be due to their lack of experience with the target languages, which led to an inadequate knowledge of korean's pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and L2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. In Situations 3 and 12, CLKs preferred diverging from both L1pragmatic norms and L2 norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatism in every DCT situation. The RIs were conducted on a one-to-one basis in the space of two days of participants completing the MQs. The RIs, 프라그마틱 무료 which were recorded and transcribed by two independent coders who then coded them. 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 if they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews

The most important problem in the field of pragmatic research is: why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? Recent research attempted to answer this question with various experimental tools including DCTs MQs and RIs. The participants were comprised of 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. The 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, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that resembled native speakers. They were aware of their practical resistance. They attributed their actions to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred external factors, like relational benefits. For instance, they outlined how their relationships with professors helped facilitate more relaxed performance in regards to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

However, the interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and consequences that they could face if they flouted their social norms. They were concerned that their native interlocutors might view them as "foreigners" and think they were incompetent. This concern was similar in nature to the concerns expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers' pragmatic norms are not the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to reassess their relevance in specific scenarios and 프라그마틱 슬롯 사이트 무료체험 (just click the up coming web site) in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better know how different cultures can affect the pragmatic behavior of students in the classroom and beyond. Moreover it will assist educators to create more effective methods to teach and test the korea-based pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi is principal advisor for Stratways Group, a geopolitical risk consulting firm based in Seoul.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigative technique that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to help support the findings, 프라그마틱 정품확인방법 게임 (Https://brockca.com/home.Php?mod=space&uid=345696) such as interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods to measure.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which can be omitted. It is also beneficial to study the literature that is relevant to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case study in a broader theoretical context.

This case study was based on an open source platform, the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its Korean-specific benchmarks, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the test revealed that L2 Korean students were highly susceptible to native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options which were literal interpretations. This was a departure from accurate pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to include their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their responses.

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

The interviewees were presented two scenarios, each involving an imagined interaction with their interactants and asked to choose one of the following strategies to use when making a request. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. The majority of participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to get along with and would not inquire about her interlocutor's well-being when they were working at a high rate, even though she thought native Koreans would.