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

Study of Chinese Learners' Pedagogical Choices in Korean

CLKs' awareness and capacity to tap into the benefits of relationships as well as learning-internal factors, were significant. For instance the RIs from TS and ZL both cited their local professor relationships as an important factor in their decision to avoid criticising the strictness of a professor (see the example 2).

This article reviews all locally published practical research on Korean until 2020. It focuses on the most important pragmatic topics including:

Discourse Construction Tests

The test for discourse completion is a common tool in pragmatic research. It has many advantages, but also a few disadvantages. For example the DCT cannot account for cultural and personal differences in communication. The DCT can also be biased and result in overgeneralizations. It is important to carefully analyze the data before it is used for research or evaluation.

Despite its limitations, the DCT can be a valuable instrument to study the relationship between prosody and information structure in non-native speakers. The ability to manipulate social variables relevant to the manner of speaking in two or more steps can be a plus. This feature can be used to study the role of prosody in different cultural contexts.

In the field of linguistics DCT is among the most useful tools to analyze the communication habits of learners. It can be used to investigate many issues, such as politeness, turn-taking, and lexical choices. It can be used to evaluate the phonological complexity of the learners speaking.

Recent research has used a DCT as a tool to assess the skills of refusal among EFL students. Participants were presented with a list of scenarios and were asked to select an appropriate response from the options provided. The authors found that the DCT was more effective than other refusal measures that included a questionnaire as well as video recordings. However, the researchers cautioned that the DCT should be used with caution and should include other types of methods for collecting data.

DCTs are typically created with specific linguistic requirements in mind, such as content and form. These criteria are intuitive and based on the assumptions of test creators. They may not be correct, and they could incorrectly describe the way in which ELF learners actually resist requests in real-world interactions. This issue calls for more study on alternative methods for assessing refusal competency.

A recent study has compared DCT responses to requests submitted by students via email with those gathered from an oral DCT. The results revealed that DCT promoted more direct and traditionally indirect request forms and made a less frequent use of hints than email data did.

Metapragmatic Questionnaires (MQs)

This study explored Chinese learners' pragmatic choices in their use of Korean using a variety of tools that were tested, including Discourse Completion Tasks (DCTs) as well as metapragmatic questionnaires and Refusal Interviews (RIs). The participants were 46 CLKs of upper-intermediate level who responded to MQs, DCTs and RIs. They were also asked for reflections on their evaluations and their refusals to participate in RIs. The results showed that CLKs often resisted native Korean pragmatic norms, and that their choices were influenced by four major factors such as their identities, their multilingual identities, their ongoing life histories, and relationship advantages. These findings have implications for pedagogy for L2 Korean assessment and teaching.

The MQ data was analyzed in order to identify the participants' practical choices. The data were categorized according to Ishihara's (2010) definition of pragmatic resistance. Then, we compared their selections with their linguistic performance using DCTs in order to determine if they were indicative of pragmatic resistance. In addition, the interviewees were asked to justify their decision to use pragmatic language in a given situation.

The findings of the MQs and DCTs were then analysed using descriptive statistics and z-tests. The CLKs were found to use euphemistic terms such as "sorry" or "thank you". This is likely due to their lack experience with the target languages, leading to an insufficient understanding of korean pragmatic norms. The results showed that the CLKs' preferences for either converging to L1 or departing from both L1 as well as L2 pragmatic norms varied by the DCT situations. For 프라그마틱 환수율 무료스핀; gtrade.cc, instance, in Situations 3 and 12 the CLKs favored to diverge from both L1 and L2 pragmatic norms, whereas in Situation 14 they favored a convergence to L1 norms.

The RIs revealed that CLKs were aware of their pragmatic resistance to each DCT situation. The RIs were conducted one-toone within two days after participants completed the MQs. The RIs were recorded and transcribed, 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 coding are contrasted with the original RI transcripts to determine if they accurately portrayed the underlying behavior.

Refusal Interviews (RIs)

One of the most important questions in pragmatic research is why some learners are hesitant to adhere to the pragmatic norms of native speakers. Recent research has attempted to answer this question by using a variety of experiments, including DCTs MQs and RIs. Participants included 44 CLKs and 46 CNSs from five Korean Universities. They were required to complete the DCTs in their native 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 think about and discuss their responses to each DCT scenario.

The results showed that, on average, the CLKs rejected native-speaker pragmatic norms in more than 40% of their responses. They did so even though they could create patterns that resembled native ones. In addition, they were aware of their pragmatism. They attributed their choice to learner-internal factors such as their personalities and multilingual identities. They also referred to external factors, such as relational benefits. For instance, they discussed how their relationships with professors facilitated a more relaxed performance with respect to the intercultural and linguistic rules of their university.

The interviewees expressed concern about the social pressures and penalties they could be subject to if their local social norms were violated. They were concerned that their native interactants might perceive them as "foreigners" and believe they are not intelligent. This was a concern similar to the concerns voiced by Brown (2013) and Ishihara (2009).

These findings suggest that native-speaker pragmatic norms are no longer the default preference of Korean learners. They may still be a useful model for official Korean proficiency tests. Future researchers should consider reassessing the usefulness of these tests in different cultural contexts and in specific situations. This will help them better understand the impact of different cultures on the pragmatic behavior and classroom interactions of L2 students. This will also aid educators improve their methods of 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 an investigative strategy that uses participant-centered, in-depth investigations to explore a specific subject. It is a method that utilizes multiple data sources to back up the findings, such as interviews and observations, documents, and artifacts. This type of investigation can be used to study unique or complex topics that are difficult for other methods of measuring.

The first step in the case study is to define the subject and the objectives of the study. This will allow you to determine which aspects of the subject matter are crucial for investigation and which ones could be left out. It is also beneficial to review existing literature related to the subject to gain a broad knowledge of the subject and to place the case study within a larger theoretical context.

This study was conducted on an open source platform such as the KMMLU leaderboard [50] and its specific benchmarks for 프라그마틱 슬롯 조작 Korea, HyperCLOVA X and LDCC-Solar (figure 1 below). The results of this experiment showed that L2 Korean learners were highly susceptible to the influence of native models. They were more likely to select incorrect answer options that were literal interpretations. This was a deviation from the correct pragmatic inference. They also showed a distinct tendency to add their own text or "garbage" to their responses. This further reduced the quality of their answers.

The participants of this study were L2 Korean students who had attained level four in the Test of Proficiency in Korean TOPIK in their third or second university year and 프라그마틱 슬롯 하는법 were aiming to attain level six on their next attempt. They were asked to respond to questions about their WTC/SPCC as well as comprehension and pragmatic awareness.

The interviewees were presented with two situations, each involving an imaginary interaction with their interlocutors and asked to choose one of the following strategies when making an inquiry. They were then asked to explain the reasoning behind their choice. Most of the participants attributed their lack of a pragmatic response to their personality. For example, TS claimed that she was hard to get close to, and she therefore refused to ask about the well-being of her friend with a heavy workload despite her belief that native Koreans would do this.