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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

In addition to the learner-internal aspects, CLKs' awareness of pragmatic resistance and the relational affordances they were able to draw from were crucial. For instance the RIs of TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as a significant factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the second example).

This article reviews all local practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on practical core topics such as:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a popular tool in the field of pragmatic research. It has many strengths, but it also has its drawbacks. The DCT, for example, is unable to account for cultural and individual differences. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used in research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations the DCT is a valuable tool for analyzing the connection between prosody, information structure, and non-native speakers. The ability to alter the social variables that are relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the impact of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has become one of the most important tools to analyze learners' communication behaviors. It can be used to study various issues, including the manner of speaking, turn-taking and the choices made in lexical use. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

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

DCTs can be developed using specific language requirements, like design and content. These criteria are intuitive and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They aren't always exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners respond to requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for further studies of different methods to assess refusal competence.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those obtained from an oral DCT. The results showed that the DCT promoted more direct and conventionally form-based requests, and a lesser use of hints than the email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' choices when it comes to using Korean through a variety of experimental tools, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). Participants were 46 CLKs at the upper intermediate level who answered MQs, DCTs, and RIs. They were also asked to provide reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs are more likely to resist native Korean pragmatic norms. Their decisions were influenced by four factors such as their personality and multilingual identities, their ongoing lives as well as their relationship affordances. These findings have pedagogical implications for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

First, the MQ data were analysed to determine the participants' rational choices. The data was classified according to Ishihara (2010)'s definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices with their linguistic performance on DCTs to determine if they are indicative of a pragmatic resistance. The interviewees also had to explain why they chose a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then examined using descriptive statistics and Z-tests. It was found that the CLKs often resorted to phrases like "sorry" and "thank you." This is likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language, 프라그마틱 무료게임 which led to a lack of knowledge of korea pragmatic norms. The results showed that CLKs' preferences to diverge from L1 and 2 norms or to move toward L1 differed based on the DCT circumstances. For example, in Situation 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms whereas in Situation 14, they favored converging to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs knew about their practical resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted in a one-to-one manner within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, and then coded by two coders from different companies. Coding was an iterative process in which the coders discussed and read each transcript. The results of the coding process are compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they captured the underlying pragmatic behavior.

Interviews with Refusal

A key question of pragmatic research is why some learners decide to rescind the pragmatic norms of native speakers. A recent study sought to answer this question by using a variety of experimental instruments, including DCTs, MQs and RIs. The participants comprised 46 CLKs, 44 CNSs, 프라그마틱 공식홈페이지 and 45 KNSs from five Korean universities. They were asked to complete the DCTs in their native language and complete the MQs in either their L1 or their L2. Then they were invited to a RI where they were asked reflect on their responses to the DCT situations.

The results showed that on average, the CLKs disapproved of native-speaker pragmatic norms in over 40% of their responses. They did this even when they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choices to learner-internal aspects such as their personalities and multilingual identities as well as ongoing life experiences. They also referred to external factors such as relational advantages. They described, for 프라그마틱 슬롯 팁 example, how their relationships with their professors allowed them to perform more comfortably in terms of the linguistic and social expectations of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures or penalties they could be subject to in the event that their local social norms were not followed. They were concerned that their native counterparts might view them as "foreignersand consider them ignorant. This is similar to the one expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native speakers pragmatic norms aren't the preferred norm for Korean learners. They could still be useful for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the applicability of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will enable them to better know how different cultures may impact the pragmatic behavior of L2 students in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to improve their methods of teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risk consulting.

Case Studies

The case study method is an investigational strategy that relies on participant-centered, deep studies to study a specific subject. It is a method that uses numerous sources of data to support the findings, including interviews, observations, documents, and artifacts. This kind of investigation can be used to analyze complicated or unique subjects that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in a case study is to define the subject and the goals of the study. This will help you determine what aspects of the subject are important to investigate and which ones can be skipped. It is also helpful to read the literature on to the topic to gain a better understanding of the subject and place the case within a larger theoretical context.

This study was based on an open-source platform, the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its Korean-specific benchmarks HyperCLOVA X, and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of the study showed that L2 Korean learners were extremely susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to choose incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations of prompts, deviating from the correct pragmatic inference. They also exhibited an unnatural tendency to add their own text or "garbage," to their responses, further reducing their quality of response.

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

The interviewees were presented two situations, each involving an imagined interaction with their co-workers and were asked to select one of the following strategies to employ when making an inquiry. The interviewees were asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their pragmatism to their personalities. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and so she refused to ask about her interactant's well-being with an intense workload, even though she believed that native Koreans would do this.