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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to make use of relational affordances, as well as the learner-internal aspects, were crucial. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both mentioned their relationships with their local professors as an important factor in their pragmatic choice to not criticize a strict professor (see example 2).

This article reviews all local pragmatic research on Korean up to 2020. It focuses on core practical issues, including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The Discourse Completion Test (DCT) is widely used in the field of pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but it also has its disadvantages. The DCT for instance, cannot account cultural and individual variations. Furthermore it is also the case that the DCT is prone to bias and could cause overgeneralizations. Therefore, 프라그마틱 무료체험 메타 it should be analyzed carefully before using it for research or for assessment purposes.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable tool to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. Its ability to use two or more stages to manipulate social variables that affect politeness can be a strength. This feature can be used to study the effect of prosody in various cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics the DCT has emerged as one of the most important tools for analyzing learners' behavior in communication. 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 level of phonological sophistication in learners' speech.

A recent study utilized the DCT to test EFL students' refusal skills. Participants were presented with various scenarios and required to choose a suitable response from the options offered. The authors discovered that the DCT to be more efficient than other methods of refusal, such as a questionnaire or video recordings. Researchers cautioned, however, that the DCT should be employed with caution. They also recommended using other methods of data collection.

DCTs are typically designed with specific linguistic criteria in mind, like content and form. These criteria are based on intuition and based upon the assumptions of test developers. They may not be exact and could be misleading in describing how ELF learners actually reject requests in real-world interactions. This issue requires more study on alternative methods for testing refusal competence.

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

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study examined Chinese learners' pragmatic 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 with intermediate or higher ability who responded to DCTs and MQs. They were also asked to consider their evaluations and refusal responses in RIs. The results revealed that CLKs were more likely to reject native Korean pragmatic norms, and their choices were influenced by four main factors such as their personalities, multilingual identities, their ongoing lives, and their relational benefits. These findings have pedagogical implications for 프라그마틱 무료체험 슬롯버프 무료체험 - networkbookmarks.com, L2 Korean assessment.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to determine the participants' choices in practice. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their choices made by the participants with their linguistic performance on the DCTs in order to determine if they were a sign of resistance to pragmatics. The interviewees also had to explain the reasons for choosing a pragmatic behavior in certain situations.

The results of the MQs, DCTs and z-tests were analyzed with descriptive statistics and Z tests. It was found that the CLKs frequently resorted to euphemistic responses such as "sorry" and "thank you." This was likely due to their lack of familiarity with the target language which led to an insufficient understanding of korea pragmatic norms. The results revealed that CLKs' preferences for converging to L1 or dissociating from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. In situations 3 and 12 CLKs favored diverging from both L1- and L2-pragmatic norms, while in Situation 14 CLKs preferred a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs also revealed CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance in each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-to-one basis within a period of two days of the participants completing the MQs. The RIs were recorded and 프라그마틱 카지노 transcribed, and then coded by two independent coders. The coding was an iterative process, where the coders discussed and read each transcript. The coding results are then compared with the original RI transcripts to determine whether they reflected the actual behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

The key problem in the field of pragmatic research is: Why do some learners choose not to accept native-speaker norms? A recent study sought to answer this question employing a variety of research instruments, including DCTs MQs, DCTs, and RIs. Participants included 46 CLKs and 44 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their first language and to complete the MQs either in their L1 or their 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 adhere to the patterns of native speakers in more than 40% of their responses. They did this even though they were able to produce patterns that were similar to native speakers. They were also aware of their pragmatic resistance. They attributed their choice to learner-internal variables such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also spoke of external factors, such as relationships and advantages. For example, they described how their relationships with professors led to a more relaxed performance in relation to the linguistic and intercultural rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concerns about the social pressures or consequences they could face in the event that their local social norms were violated. They were worried that their native interactants might think they are "foreigners" and think they are unintelligent. This concern was similar in nature to that expressed by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the norm for Korean learners. They may remain useful as a model for official Korean proficiency tests. But it is advisable for future researchers to revisit their applicability in specific situations and in different cultural contexts. This will allow them to better understand how different cultural environments may impact the pragmatic behavior of learners in the classroom and beyond. This will also assist educators to develop better methods for teaching and testing Korean pragmatics. Seukhoon Paul Choi, principal advisor at Stratways Group in Seoul, is a geopolitical risks consultancy.

Case Studies

The case study method is a research method that employs in-depth, participant-centered investigations to study a specific subject. It is a method that makes use of multiple data sources to help support the findings, such as interviews or observations, documents and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to examine complicated or unique topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in conducting a case study is to clearly define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will help determine what aspects of the subject are important to study and which can be omitted. It is also helpful to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a greater knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This case study was based upon an open-source platform called the KMMLU Leaderboard [50], along with its benchmarks for Koreans, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment revealed that L2 Korean learners were extremely vulnerable to the influence of native models. They were more likely to pick incorrect answer choices, which were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a strong tendency to add their own words or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

Furthermore, the participants of this case study were primarily L2 Korean learners who had attained level 4 in the Test of Proficiency in Korean (TOPIK) at their second or third year at university and were hoping to achieve level 6 in their next attempt. They were asked questions about their WTC/SPCC, their pragmatic awareness and understanding perception of the world.

Interviewees were presented with two scenarios that involved interaction with their co-workers and asked to select one of the strategies listed below to use when making a demand. The interviewees were then asked to justify their decision. Most of the participants attributed their rational opposition to their personalities. TS, for example said she was difficult to approach and refused to inquire about the health of her co-worker when they had a heavy work load despite the fact that she thought native Koreans would.